Here's one for your Facebook page. It seems like Mitt Romney isn't the only Republican with Romnesia. Enjoy this collection of his current Republican boosted saying what they really think about the Mittster! Dear God, even Newt Gingrich is telling the truth.

With friends like these, huh, Mitt?

DOWNLOADS: (155)

PLAYS: (1797)

Embed

After a frustratingly dull debate, the mainstream media eagerly goes to the spin room, looking for any little soundbyte from a proxy that will help drag out this horse race.

But you need to be a pretty savvy proxy to go up against the best and brightest of MSNBC's debate coverage: Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow. Rudy Giuliani, frankly, isn't that savvy. Those pesky facts about Mitt Romney's tax policy require Mr. "A Noun, a Verb and 9/11" to get quite testy, especially when it comes to his own returns:

After Giuliani stressed the need to stop "feeding the beast" of federal spending, Hayes, the host of MSNBC's Up with Chris Hayes, asked Giuliani point-blank about federal contracts he said Giuliani's firm holds with the Department of Homeland Security.

"Does the Department of Homeland Security and related spending through contracts on say, private consulting firms like yourself, does that count as feeding the beast or not?"

Giuliani denied that his firm held such contracts.

You really want to go with that post-fact response, Rudy? Because there's ample proof you're talking out of your posterior:

But in his various roles, Mr. Giuliani does not hesitate to work closely with government officials abroad and at home. As a consultant, he attended two meetings in 2002 to discuss OxyContin with Purdue executives and Mr. Hutchinson, the D.E.A. administrator at the time. As a law enforcement icon who once was one of the top three officials in the Department of Justice, he also stood next to Mr. Hutchinson that same year in Washington at a ribbon-cutting for a new Drug Enforcement Museum exhibit, an event that included a luncheon where the former mayor helped the agency's museum raise $25,000.

About 10 months after Mr. Giuliani's firm began its work for Purdue, it also won a $1.1 million contract from the Department of Justice to look for ways to improve the effectiveness of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. The force's duties included helping investigate OxyContin abuse, and Purdue officials had appealed to its director, Karen Tandy, for help, a Justice Department official said.

There's many more where that came from. But hey, when did truth matter to a Republican?

DOWNLOADS: (273)

PLAYS: (2362)

Embed

Republican primary seasons are usually so boring. They either go after each other on a personal level, or by the time South Carolina rolls around there's a nominee apparent and they close ranks around them.

Not this time. Not by a long shot. It's clear that Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry consider this a personal crusade, which is why the scorched earth strategy has been launched in a big way. The 28-minute video on KingofBain.com is a devastating indictment of capitalists like Mitt Romney who strip assets from businesses and allow them to die, after transferring pension liabilities to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

To say it's got Rudy Guiliani and Rush Limbaugh's knickers in a twist would be an understatement. Rudy was just about out of his body Thursday morning on Fox and Friends, calling Newt a student of Saul Alinsky and equating his actions to "something Barack Obama would do." There's an insult.

Rush, on the other hand, has a real problem. He cannot stand Mitt Romney, doesn't think he's any kind of real conservative, but like all good Republicans, he was ready to suck it up and let Mitt have the nomination. Now we have Newt Gingrich tossing a neutron bomb into the middle of the primary while Sheldon Adelson simultaneously funds and distances himself from it, and well...sit back and watch the fireworks.

Even though all fists were shaken in Newt's general direction, Rick Perry should not go unnoticed. Today one of his major donors, Barry Wynn, withdrew support and gave it to Mitt. Perry's response was entirely self-destructive and personal. Specifically, he said "If they want to cut and run, that's their problem." Now Wynn isn't just your ordinary run of the mill Republican. In addition to being a major donor, he's also Jim DeMint's treasurer. Yes, that Jim DeMint. Mr. UberConservative kingmaker guy. I'm not sure if Perry believes in what he's doing or he's just taking things personally enough to melt down and self-destruct. Whatever the case, it's entertaining.

According to at least one poll, it's working. A new InsiderAdvantage poll shows Newt in a statistical tie with Mitt Romney in South Carolina. Watch out, Mitt.

DOWNLOADS: (520)

PLAYS: (1167)

Embed

We know Republicans seem to have a deep-seated belief that only torture will keep us safe from the terrorists, even though the people who do real intelligence gathering can tell you that just wrong: It's ineffective and counterproductive -- not to mention morally depraved. Not that any of this seems to deter conservatives.

So the spectacle of every right-winger on the planet rushing to claim that it was torture that provided the intelligence leading to the killing of Osama bin Laden was nothing if not predictable. And of course, it turned out to be wholly wrong.

For instance, here were Rudy Giuliani and Sean Hannity last night on Fox. Most of the segment was devoted to claiming that it was "aggressive interrogation techniques" that provided the key intelligence to finding Bin Laden, though at one point Hannity actually commended President Obama -- and then lied about him:

HANNITY: But we needed the intelligence to confirm that right. Does this now bring this debate back to the forefront? And by the way, and I give President Obama a lot of credit here. Because I thought it was a gutsy choice.

GIULIANI: It was.

HANNITY: A gutsy choice, not to drop a 2,000-pound bomb but to send these guys in, so we can confirm that it's him.

GIULIANI: When you consider everything that could have gone wrong and how President Obama would look today if it did, it took a lot of courage to do that and I do admire that. And I think there's a good day the last two days for both President Obama and President Bush. Because I think President Bush set in motion all of the things that led to this. And then President Obama picked up on it and carried it out. And I give both of them a tremendous amount of credits.

HANNITY: And I do too. And this is a good day for this country and we'll going to talk to Todd Beamer's dad who's going to be on the program. And -- is going to be on the program tonight. And General Tommy Franks is on tonight. But as I look at this, would President Obama not now realize that without the intelligence, he wouldn't have had the ability to make this decision, I would hope that it might change his mind.

GIULIANI: Maybe it will. And the reality is he also at that very last minute when he's made the decision had to know that intelligence had to know, 50/50. I mean, you never know.

HANNITY: You'll never know.

GIULIANI: They were going in there to get Osama Bin Laden but who knows if it wasn't somebody that just looked like him or was like him. The better your intelligence, the more accurate your decision making and the safer we are. And the reality is, and I was glad to hear the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton say this. This is not the end, we are in the middle of this, and we can't let down our guard. We shouldn't be leaving Afghanistan as a result of this. We shouldn't be leaving Iraq, we should remain there to get the job done.

HANNITY: I agree but this is where I find myself a little conflicted here because this is almost the opposite of what candidate Obama said he would do. And maybe for the first time he's grown in office.

Oh, yeah, it was almost the opposite: -- if by "almost" you mean "the opposite of":

Continue reading »

George W. Bush was the first modern president to cut taxes during wartime. Now, the unpaid $2 trillion bill for the wars he fought - and chose to fight - is long overdue. While President Obama and the Republican leadership in Congress jockey to position their budget cutting plans, it's time for both parties - and all Americans - to pay the price we claim liberty demands. Here, then, is the Bipartisan War Tax Act of 2013.

2013, that is, because now isn't the time to raise income and other taxes. (Nor, for that matter, to reign in critical infrastructure spending and needed relief for the states.) While clearly gaining steam, the recovery from the Bush recession is still in its early stages. And, lamentably, President Obama and Congress just weeks ago inked a compromise two-year extension to the Bush tax cuts which will add another $800 billion in red ink to the U.S. national debt, much of it in new windfalls for the wealthiest Americans needing them least.

While there are countless scenarios for a war tax designed to pay off the costs of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, here are some suggested guidelines Bipartisan War Tax Act of 2013:

• Everyone pays. From the moment President Bush told us to go shopping and to "get down to Disney World" in the wake of the September 11 attacks, Americans haven't been asked to fight, pay for or otherwise sacrifice to defeat Al Qaeda. As FDR put it two days after Pearl Harbor, "We are now in this war. We are all in it-all the way. Every single man, woman, and child is a partner in the most tremendous undertaking of our American history." That must as true of our wars (and deficits) now as it was then.

• The rich pay more. This proud American tradition was met by the well-to-do of the Greatest Generation, who paid a top income tax rate of 94%. (Those stratospheric rates stayed in place until 1963, and remained as high as 77% throughout the sixties.)

• The war taxes are temporary. Just as the Bush tax cuts theoretically were supposed to sunset after a decade, so it should be for the War Tax Act. (Future deficit hawks can argue about their extension.)

• They must raise at least $3 trillion over ten years.

That price tag needs some elaboration. In September 2010, the Congressional Research Service put the total cost of the wars at $1.12 trillion, including $751 billion for Iraq and $336 billion for Afghanistan. For the 2012 fiscal year which begins on October 1, President Obama will ask for $117 billion more. (That war-fighting funding is over and above Secretary Gates' $553 billion Pentagon budget request for next year.) But in addition to the roughly $1.5 trillion tally for both conflicts through the theoretical 2014 American draw down date in Afghanistan, the U.S. faces staggering bills for veterans' health care and disability benefits. Last May, an analysis by the Center for American Progress estimated the total projected total cost of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans' health care and disability could reach between $422 billion to $717 billion. Reconstruction aid and other development assistance represent tens of billions more, as does the additional interest on the national debt. And none of the above counts the expanded funding for the new Department of Homeland Security.

But that two-plus trillion dollar tab doesn't account for the expansion of the United States military since the start of the "global war on terror." While ThinkProgress explained that the Pentagon's FY 2012 ask is "the largest request ever since World War II," McClatchy explained:

Such a boost would mark the 14th year in a row that Pentagon spending has increased, despite the waning U.S. presence in Iraq. In dollars, Pentagon spending has more than doubled in 10 years. Even adjusted for inflation, the Defense Department budget has risen 65% in the past decade.

Even with the proposed $78 billion in cuts and troop reductions advocated by Gates and Obama over the next five years, "the bottom-line figure would still go up during that time, with projected spending totaling $643 billion in 2015 and $735 billion in 2020."

Even with the reduction in staffing forecast for 2015, the Army and Marine Corps would be larger than they were when the Iraq and Afghanistan wars began.

Despite the grumbling of some Tea Party members, Congressional Republicans have made clear they want no cuts to defense as part of their $100 billion reduction in discretionary spending.

Which raises the question: why would perpetually tax-cutting Republicans agree to tax increases to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Because the Republicans believe the global terrorism poses as an existential threat to the United States. And we know this, because they repeatedly told us so.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (485)

PLAYS: (1383)

Embed

Gawd, if only we had elected Rudy Giuliani president. Just think -- as he did last night with Sean Hannity:

Giuliani: The reality is, we just need the political will to do it. It's a 2,000-mile border. It isn't that big. If you took about 20,000 border patrol agents and you put them in substations about every fifty miles, you'd be able to cover the border -- maybe even every twenty-five miles -- and then you'd use photographic equipment, nighttime photography, heat-seeking equipment, motion-detection equipment. You'd alert the people at the stations, they'd go there and stop people from coming in.

Hannity: It's that easy! It really is, that, it's --

Giuliani: It's a matter of political will. When I was running for president, I said that it would be easier to control illegal immigration than it was to reduce homicide in New York by fifty percent.

Of course, Giuliani doesn't explain how he would deal with the over 40 percent of illegal immigrants who crossed the border legally and overstayed their visas.

Nor does he contemplate the costs of running that kind of border security every twenty-five miles -- with simply no guarantee it will actually work. Indeed, every scheme they've ever devised has failed, because people always figure out ways around them. Didn't we just blow $2 billion on a "virtual fence" that turned out to be a "real world failure"?

But those are niggliing details, no doubt, too insignificant for real "terrorism experts" like Rudy Giuliani.

What frightened little children these Republicans are. The same man who thought that smart terrorism moves were to locate the Office of Emergency Management in WTC7 despite NYPD opposition, keep the same ineffective radios for FDNY from the '93 WTC bombing, recommend scandal-laden Bernie Kerik to Homeland Security and the extension of his mayoral term worries about "missed signals" by the Obama administration.

GIULIANI: I really at this point am frustrated by the lack of urgency that is shown about these terrorism matters. I mean, we've had three now where we've seen, you know, big breakdowns: Fort Hood, Christmas Day, and now -- and now this one.

It's about time that we stopped thinking about it and we stopped studying it. I don't know how often the attorney general said he was

studying things. How about we stop studying and we start doing things,

like we change Miranda, like we fix what appears to be a policy of

political correctness in which we missed every signal that related to

Major Hasan and promoted him in the military?

And here we missed some very big signals that Shahzad was giving us,

going back to Pakistan, remaining there for five or six months, bringing

in -- I've forgotten exactly how much cash he brought in from Pakistan,

but I think it was something like $60,000...

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: It was something like -- I think it was $80,000...

GIULIANI: Eighty thousand dollars in cash.

TAPPER: ... but it was several -- several years ago, yes.

GIULIANI: Yes, but that doesn't trigger an alarm, even several

years ago?

Well, Rudy, several years ago, the Obama administration wasn't in charge. Why should they be blamed for that? And how scary you think it's time to start acting--doing something, anything--rather than take a studied course of action. Haven't we seen the consequences of this kind of unexamined action enough in this country? Of course this is the guy so untethered to reality that he has no problem saying that there were no attacks on GWB's watch.

I have to ask the question: what would it take for this to have been considered a success by Republicans? The plan was foiled and the suspect was caught within 72 hours. I'm not seeing political correctness hampering anything. Is Giuliani suggesting that we shouldn't be afraid of profiling? Sorry, Rudy. That's just plain un-American.

DOWNLOADS: (935)

PLAYS: (1987)

Embed

Remember how the crowds at the 2008 Republican National Convention all chanted "Drill Baby Drill," led by the likes of Michael Steele, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and most of all by Sarah Palin? Here's what Palin said in her debate with Joe Biden:

The chant is "drill, baby, drill." And that's what we hear all across this country in our rallies because people are so hungry for those domestic sources of energy to be tapped into. They know that even in my own energy-producing state we have billions of barrels of oil and hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of clean, green natural gas. And we're building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline which is North America's largest and most you expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets.

Barack Obama and Senator O'Biden, you've said no to everything in trying to find a domestic solution to the energy crisis that we're in. You even called drilling -- safe, environmentally-friendly drilling offshore -- as raping the outer continental shelf.

There -- with new technology, with tiny footprints even on land, it is safe to drill and we need to do more of that.

Yeah, it sure is safe:

Coast Guard officials were investigating reports on Friday that crude oil leaking from a well beneath the Gulf of Mexico had washed ashore, threatening wildlife in fragile marshes and islands along the Gulf Coast.

As the vast and growing oil slick spread across the Gulf and approached shore, fishermen in coastal towns feared for their businesses and the White House stepped up its response to the worsening situation.

President Obama ordered a freeze on new offshore drilling leases until a review of the oil rig accident that caused the spill could be concluded, and new safeguards put in place.

“I continue to believe that domestic oil production is an important part of our overall strategy for energy security,” Mr. Obama said on Friday, addressing concerns about whether the administration would continue with its plan to increase drilling in the Gulf.

Even so, he said, “the local economies and livelihoods of the people of the Gulf Coast as well as the ecology of the region are at stake.”

Of course, for some people, that's a negligible concern:

Fund managers and analysts in the City said they were deeply worried about the financial cost to BP of the kind of legal action that could be taken in the US by those damaged by the accident.

Why, nobody could have predicted this, right? Even though BP was fined a record $87 million last September for safety violations in Texas.

Well at least Newt Gingrich has remained consistent:

In 2008, Newt Gingrich began American Solutions for Winning the Future (ASWF), the casino-funded 527 that used the slogan “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” to promote the false idea that new offshore drilling could lower gas prices. On its website, Gingrich’s ASWF is continuing its petition while reporting on the inevitable consequences of dependence on dirty oil.

And, as Brad Johnson at the Wonk Room reports, this is shaping up to be a worse environmental disaster than the Exxon Valdez disaster.

We sure eager to hear what the "Drill Baby Drill" crowd will say now. No doubt they'll find a way to blame Obama for the mess.

UPDATE: Sure enough. Limbaugh: Oil spill is "Obama's Katrina". I understand this was the talking point this morning on "liberal" MSNBC's Morning Joe.

UPDATE II: Josh Nelson notes that Palin has tweeted her compassion:

Isn't that special? Gotta love the heartfelt compassion there. That and three bucks will get you a double-tall latte at Starbucks.

Not a surprise, but yet to be confirmed by other less..Fox-y sources:

Republican Florida Governor Charlie Crist has decided he will run as an independent in the race to fill the Florida U.S. Senate seat, Crist allies tell Fox News. The official announcement is scheduled for Thursday at 5pm ET in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The Senate campaign has been rough and tumble for Crist, he was once the front-runner -- but in recent months began trailing his GOP opponent, Florida State Speaker Marco Rubio.

Crist has said that under no circumstance would he drop out of the race, saying he will do what is best for the voters of Florida. The governor says Republicans in Washington want him to stay in the Republican party but voters in Florida have told him they want him to run as an independent.

His campaign and the governor's office have not officially confirmed anything, however this move by Crist has made internal communications difficult because some staff are unlikely to continue to work with Crist as an independent candidate.

The governor is expected to use much of Thursday for courtesy calls to supporters, allies and some Republican officials nationwide. Close advisers expect him to say tomorrow that he looks forward to caucusing with Republicans but that is not a certainty, there are still some issues being worked out and discussed.

Rubio has clinched endorsements from big name Republicans including former Vice President Dick Cheney, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former 2008 presidential candidate and Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

It should be noted that with the exception of Holy Joe Lieberman, few candidates successfully bail on their party and clinch an election. However, Crist may be the exception that proves the rule.

Hat tip to Steve Benen.

Following up on self-acclaimed "nuclear expert" Rudy Giuliani's opinions on Obama's Nuclear Posture Review, we have this quote by Mackenzie Eaglen (Heritage Foundation):

The Nuclear Posture Review unnecessarily takes sovereign U.S. options off the table when responding to various types of chemical or biological attacks.

Americans intuitively understand the flaw in this approach. Special agent Jack Bauer of "24" had to thwart terrorists attempting to steal nerve gas. If this had actually occurred, the President should not tie one hand behind the nation's back when evaluating the appropriate response to defend American citizens.

The mind reels. Really? We're supposed to build national strategy based on fictional action dramas? Well, I suppose it's not unprecedented.