From The Colbert Report:
Barack Obama loses the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races, and Chris Christie uses Monty Python to attack Jon Corzine.
Lawrence O'Donnell tears into Liz Cheney for her remarks criticizing President Obama for his visit to Dover AFB. Liz Cheney lies again. Chip off the old block.
O'DONNELL: When President Obama honored our Afghanistan war dead by taking part in a military ritual at Dover Air Force Base yesterday, it was easily predictable that a Republican would criticize him for it. And in our fourth story on the Countdown, the former Vice President's pet attack dog, his daughter Liz Cheney, has now done just that. And once again, she wasn't going to let the facts get in the way.
On the John Gibson radio show yesterday, Ms. Cheney was rehashing her father's fact-free critique of President Obama's war in Afghanistan, and then Mr. Gibson asked her about the President's appearance at Dover Air Force Base.
LIZ CHENEY (RADIO AUDIO): I don't know why he went to Dover. I mean, I think that clearly it is very important for a commander-in-chief, whenever he can in whatever way it possible, to pay tribute to our fallen soldiers, our fallen military folks. But, I think, you know, what President Bush used to do was do it without the cameras, and I don't understand sort of showing up with the White House Press Pool with photographers and asking the family if you can take pictures. I just... that's really hard for me to get my head around—I think it's an honorable and important thing for us to pay tribute. There's no greater sacrifice people make to the nation. But, it was a surprising way for the President to choose to do it.
O'DONNELL: As we mentioned yesterday, President Bush never went to Dover Air Force Base to honor dead American soldiers on their final journey. And Vice President Cheney... never did either.
Hey Liz, have you ever lost a relative in battle? I have. My cousin Johnny, West Point graduate like his father before him. I wish the President or the Vice President had met his casket on the way home.
You know what 'never' means, Liz? It means zero. It means that in over seven years of two wars, your dad never left the comfort of his White House office or the Vice President's mansion and got himself up to Dover to bear witness to how his warmongering fell on families of dead American soldiers. Never, not once.
I'm so glad someone who has been there has finally said it:
(I)n a move that has sent ripples all the way to the White House, (former Marine Corps Captain Matthew) Hoh, 36, became the first U.S. official known to resign in protest over the Afghan war, which he had come to believe simply fueled the insurgency.
"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan," he wrote Sept. 10 in a four-page letter to the department's head of personnel. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."
The reaction to Hoh's letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay.
U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry brought him to Kabul and offered him a job on his senior embassy staff. Hoh declined. From there, he was flown home for a face-to-face meeting with Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"We took his letter very seriously, because he was a good officer," Holbrooke said in an interview. "We all thought that given how serious his letter was, how much commitment there was, and his prior track record, we should pay close attention to him."
While he did not share Hoh's view that the war "wasn't worth the fight," Holbrooke said, "I agreed with much of his analysis." He asked Hoh to join his team in Washington, saying that "if he really wanted to affect policy and help reduce the cost of the war on lives and treasure," why not be "inside the building, rather than outside, where you can get a lot of attention but you won't have the same political impact?"
Hoh is quick to say he's not some hippie peace-nik. Sigh. Why does he make that sound like a bad thing? But Hoh does feel that our presence does nothing but escalate violence and turmoil with the Afghans.
(M)any Afghans, he wrote in his resignation letter, are fighting the United States largely because its troops are there -- a growing military presence in villages and valleys where outsiders, including other Afghans, are not welcome and where the corrupt, U.S.-backed national government is rejected. While the Taliban is a malign presence, and Pakistan-based al-Qaeda needs to be confronted, he said, the United States is asking its troops to die in Afghanistan for what is essentially a far-off civil war.
As the White House deliberates over whether to deploy more troops, Hoh said he decided to speak out publicly because "I want people in Iowa, people in Arkansas, people in Arizona, to call their congressman and say, 'Listen, I don't think this is right.' "
"I realize what I'm getting into . . . what people are going to say about me," he said. "I never thought I would be doing this."
From Washington Journal Oct. 25, 2009. When asked what his assessment of President Obama's first ten months in office was, Rep. Dennis Kucinich stressed the need for job creation and said the "when the private sector doesn't provide the jobs; the government has a moral responsibility to provide jobs. FDR recognized that back in the 30's, and I hope the Obama administration will recognize that in the 21st century".
If you would like to watch the entire interview my cohort CSPANJunkie has it posted at You Tube.
Good for Joe Conason for pointing out that Pat Buchanan of all people has no business complaining about the Obama administration daring to point out that Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party after all of the things the Nixon administration did that Buchanan himself was involved in. Chris Matthews sure wasn't going to do it.
Media Matters has a nice run down of why this latest meme by the right calling the Obama administration "Nixonian" is utterly ridiculous.
Conason wrote about many of the points he attempted to make to Buchanan during this segment in his column at Salon this week--
Criticizing Fox News isn't "Nixonian." But Fox News is:
With outraged Washington journalists and Republican politicians crying "Nixonian!" over the public scuffle between the Obama White House and the Fox News Channel, what began as a mundane spat is turning into a cosmic jest. Somewhere, Nixon himself is enjoying a mordant laugh to hear this shrill defense of his old servant Roger Ailes, the television wizard whose deceptive campaigning ushered him into the presidency more than 40 years ago -- and who then became the living symbol of everything negative and nasty in American politics during the two decades that followed.
To understand what is going on today, it is essential to remember that where Ailes came from, "Nixonian" was not an insult but a badge of honor -- and seething hatred and even persecution of the press, rather than mere criticism, was a way of life.
Whatever the merits or defects of the strategy pursued by Obama's communications office in pushing back against Fox News, the furious backlash inside the Beltway is badly overwrought. Mainstream defenders of the conservative cable channel suddenly seem to be afflicted with a strange amnesia, causing them to forget not just the numerous episodes of partisan distortion that have permanently pocked its reputation, but the dirty war against the press and the First Amendment that was waged by the Nixon gang in the late '60s and early '70s. That lost memory does a disservice to journalism and history.
Transcript via Lexis Nexis below the fold.
October 23, 2009 NBC Jay Leno
Oh look! Annie's trying to sell another book—and spouting her typical outrageous crap which is frankly growing quite tiresome. I'd like to know why Joy Behar thinks Coulter should be given another national format besides ClusterFox to spread her bile.
Behar asks Ann Coulter why there are so many more threats against President Obama to the point that it’s “straining the Secret Service” and of course Coulter is completely dismissive of the idea that what Behar cited is even true.
Coulter: I do not—I don’t know what the evidence is. I would be shocked if there were more threats against Obama.
Behar: I’m telling you—what is this another “I don’t believe the polls”? I’m telling you…
Coulter: It’s not a poll. I think they may be more aggressive about investigating it. But…
Behar: No, no, no—he’s getting more threats.
Coulter: A…As I have not only witnessed in my own life but described in guilty, every Presidential assassination or attempted Presidential assassination was committed by some sort of left wing loon, communist, anarchist, communitarians—yes they were—or they had no politics at all.
Behar: But the home grown terrorists are also another group that we have to worry about here.
Coulter: OK, but they’re all liberals, so if Obama gets assassinated…
Behar: Don’t make that jump from murderer to terrorist to liberals. That is an outrageous statement and you know it.
Coulter: Well it’s all described in Guilty… (crosstalk) …if you go through it assassin, by assassin, by assassin and moreover you to a…
Behar: Look, they’re not liberal…they’re murderers, they’re terrorists. Stop it.
Coulter: Right, but OK, what is the idealogy…
Behar: Stop it.
Coulter: They are communists. Look…
Behar: They are communists?
Coulter: Lee Harvey Osward tried to move to the Soviet Union. He was on his way to Cuba. He was a communist. You have one after another of all these guys. So it isn’t…it isn’t because Obama is liberal…if something happens to him it’s going to be MoveOn.org.
Behar: It’s because he’s black. Well come on. Let’s just say it.
Coulter: No, it’s…
Behar: Yes it is.
Coulter: Well OK maybe liberals, liberals are a little racist.
And the conversation goes even further downhill from there. I have neither the time nor the desire to debunk all of Coulter’s crap but I’m sure the commenters here can give us about a hundred reasons as to why what she said here is so completely wrong it’s comical, starting with the premise that all Presidential assassins were “left wing loons”. I don’t think she’s worth the energy to do so but if anyone else does, have at it. Just keep off of the he-man Coulter jokes please as not to insult any of our LGBT folks who visit the site and deserve better than being associated with the likes of Coulter-geist.
Rachel Maddow weighed in on the ongoing dust-up between the White House and Fox News and the collective freak-out by Fox and the right wing over herself and Keith Olberman, among others, being invited to a meeting at the White House. She wrapped it up with this statement:
Maddow: You can be upset all you want that the president meets with people who you disagree with. But consider being fair and balanced in your criticism, at least admit that this White House has met with both sides while the Bush White House did not. You should especially admit that if you happened to have been a member of the Bush White House during that administration.
Keith joined Rachel later in the segment and talked about how hypocritical and completely disingenuous all of this pearl clutching has been by the right.
Transcript below the fold.
Gotta' love that GOP/Fox News echo chamber with this latest talking point. Lamar Alexander repeats his 'enemies list' accusation made earlier in the day on the Senate floor.
From Think Progress--GOP Communications Arm In Action: Republican Senator Takes Up Fox News’ ‘Enemies List’ Attack On Obama:
For the past couple of weeks, Fox News’ Sean Hannity has been aggressively pushing the talking point that the Obama White House is compiling an “enemies list.” That wild accusation came in response to Obama communications director Anita Dunn’s suggestion that Fox News operates as a “communications arm” of the GOP.
“I mean, is this an enemies list? Seems like it to me,” Hannity said on his program last Wednesday. “They want to come after the Fox News Channel,” the right-wing pundit complained. Almost every night in recent weeks, Hannity has badgered his guests, demanding that they take up his talking point. Last night, Liz Cheney took the bait:
HANNITY: It seems to me, it’s almost like an enemies list. Is that a fair description?
CHENEY: Well, uhh, yeah.
[...]
Yesterday, Hannity won his biggest convert yet. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) took to the Senate floor and read Sean Hannity’s talking points into the congressional record:
ALEXANDER: I want to make what I hope will be a friendly suggestion to President Obama and his White House, and it is this: don’t create an enemies list. […]
So in conclusion Mr. President, here’s my point. These are unusually difficult times with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list.
Watch a compilation:
As Think Progress also noted, Karl Rove accused the White House of keeping an enemies list on Fox News Sunday last weekend. And now we have Alexander following suit. For someone complaining that the White House is being unfair in claiming that Fox News is a communications arm of the Republican party, Alexander is certainly doing a good job of proving it as he does it. My only question might be which one is leading and which is following? I would imagine it's Fox following since I'm pretty sure Hannity gets all of his talking points straight from the RNC.
Steve Benen weighed in on this today as well:
While I don't doubt this will make for weeks of breathless speculation on Fox News, and give a wide variety of pundits endless entertainment, that doesn't make it any less ridiculous.
The most obvious problem here is that Republicans are defining Nixonian tactics down. In effect, Alexander argued this morning that the White House's opponents and detractors will go after the president and his team, but if they respond in any way, they're necessarily acting in ways similar to the disgraced 37th president.
Look at Alexander's list. Is the White House pushing back against the Chamber of Commerce's efforts to derail the administration's agenda? Sure, what's wrong with that? Did the White House impose a "gag order" on Humana? Of course not, that's absurd. Is the White House pointing out that Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party? Yep, as well it should. Has the president criticized financial institutions that brought the global economy to the brink of a depression? Yes, but I'm not sure what's wrong with that. Has the White House criticized an insurance industry that screwed over its customers and continues to fight against sensible reform efforts? You bet, but again, that's a good thing.
Alexander, Gregg, and assorted political reporters make it seem as if the White House should be a non-partisan, non-political, take-punches-but-don't-respond entity. In other words, Obama and his team are expected to just lose every fight, and take every criticism. To do anything else leads to Nixon comparisons.
It's possible the political world has a very short memory, but it's worth remembering, as Eric Boehlert does, that Nixon's White House "declared war on his enemies (including news outlets), and used the full power of the federal government to exact his bouts of revenge."
When Nixon didn't like a news outlet, he directed federal prosecutors to investigate journalists, including going through their taxes. Nixon assembled actual enemies lists, and used the power of his office to target and try to destroy his adversaries.
That any serious person would compare these tactics to routine political efforts at the White House is insane.
You've just got to love this framing for Chris Matthews' first panel segment on his weekend bobble head show. Does President Obama have the "bedside manners" to tell the left they're not going to get a public option? How about this one instead Chris? Does President Obama have the "bedside manners" to tell anyone who wants to filibuster a public option to break out the cots and the Depends? How's that for a different lead in to this segment Chris? In case you didn't notice, it takes 51 votes to get something passed in the United States Senate, not 60. It's time for the Democrats to quit allowing these silent filibusters.
INTRO: Bedside manners--the time is coming when our Democratic President will have to break the bad news to his liberal supporters and have to tell them that they can't get the kind of health care bill on which they have set their hearts. Does he have the strong bedside manner to give them the bad news and still keep their spirits up?
[...]
MATTHEWS: Boy, Dan, this is a rock and a hard place. The liberals in the Congress are pushing and pushing, and the president has to face reality. He needs 60 senators, 218 members of the Congress.
Mr. DAN RATHER: Uh-huh.
MATTHEWS: Can both meet peacefully?
Mr. RATHER: No. The president isn't going to get a--the--what's been described as a public option. He may get something close to that, something he can camouflage up as if--he isn't going to get it. And this is going to take a long time, Chris. I wouldn't be surprised if we aren't talking about this same subject late into December. And there is the question of public fatigue. I think he will get a bill, I think it will be progress along the lines of health care reform, but he's going to need a health care reform number two. And whether he can get that in an election year of 2010 is a real open question.
MATTHEWS: Kelly, you cover it all the time, and my question is, can you square a circle? You've got people on the Republican side now, Olympia Snowe, who's aboard so far. Maybe Susan Collins, the other senator from Maine. Maybe, maybe. But you've also got Joe Lieberman of Connecticut saying, `I'm here for the--for the insurance industry of Hartford. I'm not going to be for this bill as it stands.'
Ms. KELLY O'DONNELL: Well, getting all the Democrats will be tough if you're talking about a government insurance plan. That is going to be difficult because not only Joe Lieberman, but there are a number of moderates. When you're talking about Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins, the Republican ladies of Maine who get a lot of attention, they're kind of--they're using their influence really effectively right now. They still can have a phone call with the president, a one-on-one meeting with the president, which most Republicans don't have any chance of having, and they're still also talking to Republicans, expressing concerns about what it would cost, how big the change would be, could government be competent to have this kind of a program. So they're keeping the conversation going. In the end you could see Snowe, you could see Collins joining on, but that might be crucial to get to 60 because you may lose some of the moderate Democrats.
MATTHEWS: Right. Well, that's what I don't get here. Helene, jump in here. I mean, you cover the White House. How in the world does this president deliver health care if the price is a public option, when so many people who will have to vote for this to pass are against it? I don't see how it works.
The Rock Obama returns to Saturday Night Live, this time in response to Max Baucus, Olympia Snowe and Mitch McConnell's lack of cooperation on some actual health care reform.
Eric Burns from the invaluable Media Matters weighs in on Antia Dunn's statement on Reliable Sources that Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party. Burns warns that they are even more dangerous and powerful than that and I agree with him.
O'DONNELL: Joining us now is Eric Burns, president of Media Matters for America, a not-for-profit group that monitors conservative misinformation in the media. Welcome.
BURNS: Thank you.
O'DONNELL: Why has the White House finally come out and stated the obvious, that the Fox News Channel is opinion journalism masquerading as news?
BURNS: Look, Anita Dunn has it exactly right with her description of Fox News. I said as much on this program just two weeks ago. But I take it a step further, Lawrence. I think that what we have all thought of as a conservative news organization has really morphed itself this year into a 24/7 political operation with a very specific goal. And that is to destroy this presidency, and destroy any sort of progressive policy agenda that the American people voted for in November.
That's their goal. They have set it. You saw it at the top of the clip. And I think that that's what we are dealing with. And so Anita Dunn is absolutely right to call them out for that.
From The Onion:
White House officials are confident the President will be able to convince the wildfire to stop incinerating large swaths of land and American homes.
Chris Matthews and Jim Cramer praise President Obama, Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner for saving us from another Great Depression while failing to note a number of things. One, what caused the financial collapse in the first place that resulted in the need to rescue it. Two, that we still don't know where all of our tax dollars went. And three, that the system is still not safe and as Simon Johnson just pointed out on Bill Moyers Journal, things could worse because the system has not been reformed.
Matthews: Well, I guess the big question I would have Jim is if you had to look say five, ten years from now, looking back to now with the clarity of history, does Barack Obama deserve credit for a) avoiding a second Great Depression as he came into office with a strong stimulus of almost two trillion dollars in fiscal stimulus, huge printing of money, the bailouts etc. and secondly has he really put us on the course to recovery from this recession?
Cramer: Alright, I think it’s a team effort. Chris, first of all Ben Bernanke was late, but really went into high gear and the transition from Bush to Obama was really saved by Bernanke’s actions. Second, Bernanke did a good thing, but also Tim Geithner did a good thing and you could argue well Tim Geithner’s totally Obama’s man. Geithner made everybody feel that the banking system was safe. Once we had the banking system safe we began to have the recovery. So Obama should get a lot of credit for that.
Matthews: Well you know when the politicians wag and the right wing goes after them as they do—that’s the way politics works—they say bailouts, bailouts, bailouts as if there’s something wrong with the guy. They say deficits, deficits, deficits as if there’s something wrong with the guy. But everything I studied on college and grad school was that you’ve got to do those things, both in terms of the sectors of the economy which were in trouble, the financial sectors, the auto industry and you had to do something with regard to the over all economy in terms of printing the money, monetary policy, fiscal policy. The very things he did are things you’re taught you have to do. Am I wrong?
Cramer: No! You’re totally right. I hear those people criticize and I think, did they ever read any history about what this country did wrong between 1929 and 1932? This was exactly—what these pundits are calling for is exactly what created a multi-year depression. No! I mean, Bernanke, Obama, Geithner…they got it right!
Matthews: Well, all you hear from on the right is like Terry Jeffrey’s my pal who sits there like from Human Events on the far right, they come on here as if all you had to do was laissez faire. Step back; let the invisible hand solve the problem. Say’s law is still in effect, everything’s going to clear—they actually say this crap… so loudly they must believe it or else they’re just desperate. But they do believe that doing nothing was the right answer. Just balance the budget.
Cramer: They’re dreamers. Look!
Matthews: Let business solve the problem.
Cramer: Here’s the hand. It wasn’t invisible. It was choking America. We are very lucky that these guys understood history. Now the reason why it’s easy to criticize Obama and why he doesn’t take any credit is we haven’t created any jobs yet Chris.
Matthews: Yeah.
Cramer: And that is bad.
Sadly being humiliated by Jon Stewart was not enough to keep Jim Cramer from ever appearing on my television set again. He was right back on the air pretending it didn't happen. I don't know why anyone would take this guy's advice about anything. Later in the segment he also said this when asked about where we were headed with unemployment.
I think we are at the peak or within .1 [of the peak]. We are not going to breach 10%. I have my neck on the line on that.
Oy.
From yesterday's gay rights march in D.C. A partial transcript from Political Carnival:
Lady GaGa is speaking:
"This is the single most important moment of my career."
And then she came out with this non sequitur:
"As you know, I love Judy Garland."
Okay then.
Next:
"Obama, I know that you're listening."
Then she literally screeched:
"ARE YOU LISTENING???!!!!"
She went on:"And to Barney Frank, we are putting more than pressure on this grass, and today this grass is ours. [...] Bless God and bless the gays!"
