You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (54)

PLAYS: (158)

September 30, 2009 CNN-- From The Cafferty File:

It’s been almost six months since the Obama administration lifted the ban on media coverage of the returning caskets of war dead… and the press mostly seems to have lost interest.

“The Examiner” reports how back in April, media outlets rushed to cover the first arrival of a fallen U.S. serviceman… 35 members of the press were at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.

For the next returning casket — 17 media outlets showed up… that soon dropped to a dozen. The numbers kept shrinking until this month when only one news outlet was on hand to document the return of a casket bearing the body of a fallen Marine. That was the Associated Press.

In fact, the A-P has made it a point to be there at every arrival of a military casket where the family has granted permission — which is more than half of the time. The AP says it’s their responsibility to cover these returns:

“It’s our belief that this is important, that surely somewhere there is a paper, an audience, a readership, a family and a community for whom this homecoming is indeed news.”

But where are the rest of the media outlets who protested President Bush’s continued ban on showing flag-draped coffins returning to the U.S.?

This is especially troubling in light of what’s going on in Afghanistan. Nearly eight years into that war, 2009 will record the highest death toll.

Conventional wisdom suggests if the American people aren’t seeing the returning war dead — it’s difficult to comprehend the real cost of war.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean when media coverage of fallen troops’ returning caskets has all but disappeared?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1375)

PLAYS: (5410)

I agree with Jack Cafferty on DeLay's appearance on Dancing With the Stars.

Cafferty: Did you show that Tom DeLay video yet. That's just disturbing...

Blitzer: If you haven't seen it...

Cafferty: It's just disturbing. It's very disturbing.

Blitzer: It takes guts to do that.

Cafferty: It takes something. I'm not sure guts is it.

Blitzer: Wild thing, you make my heart sing.

Cafferty: When he goes to prison they can show that, like the dances and stuff to the general inmate population.

h/t TPM Muckraker

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (94)

PLAYS: (298)

From The Cafferty File:

Tens of thousands of protesters marched on Washington Saturday — in the largest demonstration against Pres. Obama since he took office. The march leading to the Capitol was loud and animated and stretched on for blocks.

It seemed like the culmination of what started out as Tea Parties in the spring against the president’s economic stimulus package — and turned into health care protests over the summer.

These protesters have managed to give a voice to an opposition — something that Republicans have been trying mostly unsuccessfully to do.

The crowd was protesting a whole range of things — there were opponents of Mr. Obama’s tax, spending and health care plans, as well as those who are concerned about the government’s possible encroachment on their right to bear arms.

There were accusations of socialism and shouts of “liar.” Protests like this also attract the lunatic fringe — who questioned the president’s citizenship, compared his administration to Nazi Germany and even those who likened the president himself to an African witch doctor.

The White House says the protesters are “wrong” about health care and that the president does not think the protests and the growing conservative movement against him are motivated by racism.

Whatever the cause it’s worth noting that tens of thousands of people gave up their Saturday to march on Washington, D.C. against a man who has only been in office eight months.

Here’s my question to you: What message do tens of thousands of protesters marching on Washington send to Pres. Obama?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (71)

PLAYS: (161)

From The Cafferty File:

Attorney General Eric Holder has named a federal prosecutor to investigate allegations of torture by the CIA. This coincides with the release of the 2004 Inspector General’s report of CIA interrogation tactics including waterboarding, staging mock executions, and threatening suspects with guns, power drills, and the safety of their family members.

It also mentions moving detainees to prisons in countries where torture is practiced. A redacted version of the report was first released after the ACLU sued last year but clearly the details were in the redacted sections.

This is all happening as the President announced a change in intelligence gathering — shifting the responsibility for terrorism interrogations to the FBI and away from the CIA.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has said all along the Inspector General’s report would prove that interrogation tactics were successful in obtaining useful information from detainees that prevented additional attacks on the U.S. He says we should be praising the people responsible for conducting these interrogations. Cheney is also raising questions about the Obama Administration’s ability to protect Americans.

Nine Republican lawmakers have sent a letter to the Attorney General urging him not to launch a criminal investigation because it would jeopardize “security for all Americans, chill future intelligence activities,” and could “leave us more vulnerable to attack.”

The point of the investigation is to determine if laws were broken. For most people, when a law is broken there are consequences. The question remains whether the people who authorized all this stuff will ever be held accountable.

Here’s my question to you: Is naming a special prosecutor to investigate torture a good idea?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (110)

PLAYS: (206)

August 24, 2009 CNN--From The Cafferty File:

More good news from our government. Friday the White House said deficits would climb to $9 trillion over the next ten years bringing the total national debt to $20 trillion a decade from now.

The government also announced Social Security recipients will get no cost of living adjustments during the next two years. That hasn’t happened since automatic increases were put into place in 1975. We can find hundreds of billions of dollars for AIG and Wall Street, but we can’t give our senior citizens a small cost of living increase in their social security. When does the revolution start?

We’re in the midst of a recession not seen since the great depression. Millions of Americans are out of work, unemployment has soared to 9.4 percent. Millions of good paying jobs have been have been shipped overseas never to return. And the manufacturing base that was once the engine of our economy is on life support. We simply don’t make “things” anymore.

We are in debt up to our eyeballs to China and other foreign countries as we increasingly look to them to finance out deficit spending. And through it all have you noticed? There’s no talk in Washington of cutting expenses or reducing the size of government.

There are unfunded liabilities in the tens of trillions of dollars for Medicare and Social Security; and no plan for how to pay for health care reform. Add in the drain of millions of illegal aliens and the fact that many states are bankrupt. We’re in serious trouble here.

Here’s my question to you: How is the American dream changing?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (746)

PLAYS: (2268)

From The Cafferty File:

The increasingly bitter battle over health care reform is making some people question President Obama’s leadership.

Critics suggest that when it comes to governing on issues like health care, the president is missing the smooth confidence and “Yes we can” charisma that got him elected.

New York Times Columnist Maureen Dowd writes of this debate that seems to be spinning out of control:

“President Obama has proven quicksilver instincts, but not in this case. You would think that a politician schooled in community organizing and the foul balls of a presidential campaign would be ready to squash this kind of nuttiness.” Dowd adds that Mr. Obama knows how to rise to the occasion, but he may be running out of time to do so.

On Salon.com, Camille Paglia criticizes the president for proposing only “vague and slippery promises” when it comes to health care. Paglia, who supports the president, faults him for handing over much of the debate to congressional leaders and also seeming to be in an unexplained rush to get something – anything – passed.
She compares it to the “massive boondoggle” of the economic stimulus package, which the president pretty much gave Congress free rein to turn into one big pork project.

And it’s not just health care. The list of issues this president faces is mind-boggling and probably unprecedented: from the economy and healthcare to immigration reform (which Mr. Obama now says won’t happen until next year) on the home front… to Afghanistan, Iran, and North Korea overseas.

Critics say on a lot of this stuff, the president is talking, not leading.

So here's the question: Is Barack Obama meeting your expectations as president?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (112)

PLAYS: (446)

August 11, 2009 CNN from The Cafferty File:

First she called Pres. Obama’s health care plan “evil” and said it would create “death panels.” Now Sarah Palin is urging restraint at town hall meetings.

In comments on her Facebook page, the former governor of Alaska (who quit in the middle of her first term) says there are many “disturbing details” in the health care bill, but that “we must stick to a discussion of the issues and not get sidetracked by tactics that can be accused of leading to intimidation or harassment.”

Palin suggests the disruptive protests “diminish our nation’s civil discourse”, and says opponents shouldn’t give supporters of health care reform any reason to criticize them.

This is the same woman who a few days ago was spreading a false claim that Pres. Obama would force the elderly and disabled to appear before a “death panel.” She said a group of bureaucrats would get to decide whether people like her parents and her son, who has Down Syndrome, could get health care.

There’s no such provision in the bill. Gee, do you suppose she didn’t read it? Rather, a House committee passed a provision that would let Medicare reimburse seniors who want counseling on end-of-life issues. Once again, Sarah Palin’s version of reality is at odds with reality.

Whatever the reason, Palin backed down. See, she wasn’t getting much support. Several Republican governors distanced themselves from her, either refusing to comment or saying Palin could “speak for herself.” Not exactly the way to build that right-of-center coalition she keeps talking about.

SO HERE’S THE QUESTION: Are you interested in Sarah Palin’s views on health care reform?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (71)

PLAYS: (118)

From The Cafferty File:

The news media are fighting to survive — and Dan Rather thinks the government should help rescue them. The former CBS anchorman is calling on President Obama to create a White House commission to help save the press.

Rather says such a commission could make recommendations on saving journalism jobs and creating new business models to help the industry survive. He says there are precedents for this kind of national commission — which have helped other failing industries.

Rather says the stakes couldn’t be any higher. He told the Aspen Daily News: “A truly free and independent press is the red beating heart of democracy and freedom.” And he says it’s not just journalists who should worry about the fate of the press; but rather every citizen.

He also talked about “the dumbing down and sleazing up” of what we see on the news; and blames that on the blurry line between news and entertainment — along with corporate and political influence on newsrooms. He claims about 80-percent of the media is controlled by a handful of corporations.

Rather also talks about the decline in investigative and international reporting; and says the loss of reporters covering the two ongoing wars hurts our nation.

The bottom line as he sees it: If somebody doesn’t step in and take action… the nation will lose its independent media.

Here’s my question to you: Should the federal government be involved in saving the news media?

Jack misses the mark here. It's not a matter of opinion whether 80 percent of the media is controlled by a handful of corporations. It's simply a fact. A better question would have been should these companies be broken up, but of course Jack would never be allowed to ask that question. His responses below the fold.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (72)

PLAYS: (135)

From The Cafferty File:

Tomorrow marks an historic day for Iraq — the deadline for U.S. combat troops to pull out of its cities — and Iraqis are reacting with mixed feelings. The government has declared it a national holiday, with celebrations and military parades planned.

Many Iraqis say they’re glad to see Americans gone… that they will feel freedom and liberation. But, others aren’t so sure… One Baghdad resident says she feels “fear and horror”… and says many Iraqis will be “afraid of each other.” Others say they have come to depend on U.S. troops.

More than six-years after the invasion — the U-S says Iraqi forces are ready to take control of security in the cities. We’ll see soon enough. The last 10 days have seen several bomb attacks and assorted violence which has left more than 200 Iraqis dead and hundreds more wounded. Iraqi and U.S. officials had warned of an expected rise in attacks around this withdrawal date.

After the handover — U.S. forces will have to get permission from Iraq to go into cities or carry out operations in urban areas. There will be a small number of U.S. troops remaining in cities to train and advise Iraqi forces — but most of them will be in bases outside city limits.

There are about 131,000 U.S. troops still in Iraq. Most are supposed to leave the country by next summer, with all forces gone by the end of 2011.

Here’s my question to you: What is life likely to be like in Iraq without the presence of U.S. combat forces in its cities?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (993)

PLAYS: (2380)

From the Cafferty File:

Goldman Sachs is on track to make the biggest bonus payouts in the company’s 140-year history — according to a report in the British newspaper ‘The Guardian’. Goldman staff in London were reportedly told that they could expect record bonuses if the company — as predicted — has its most profitable year ever.The investment bank’s earnings are up for several reasons — including a lack of competition, along with increased revenue from trading foreign currency, bonds and fixed income products.

Just last week Goldman Sachs repaid the government the $10 billion in TARP money it had received — which would leave it free to do whatever it wants. Yet the company is denying these reports about record bonuses, calling them “pure speculation.” They say they won’t know what bonuses will be until the end of December.

But the company’s CEO told lawmakers recently that the firm is obligated to “ensure that compensation reflects the true performance of the firm and motivates proper behavior.”

Critics say the culture of excessive risk and excessive bonuses is what brought down the financial system in the first place. Also, in light of the ongoing recession, record unemployment, foreclosures and a whole range of economic woes… some might wonder if this would be the best time for Goldman to pay out record bonuses.

It’s believed the firm paid $1 million or more to nearly 1,000 bankers last year.

Here’s my question to you: What message would it send if Goldman Sachs makes the biggest bonus payouts in its 140-year history?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (91)

PLAYS: (194)

From The Cafferty File:

There is a fundamental gender gap when it comes to American politics. A new Gallup poll of almost 150,000 people shows women are significantly more likely than men to identify themselves as Democrats.

Consider this: 41 percent of women say they’re Democrats; that’s nine-points higher than the 32-percent of men who say that. 26-percent of women identify themselves as Independents — compared to 34-percent of men. As for those who identify themselves as Republicans, there’s not much of a difference there — 25-percent of women compared to 28-percent of men.

What’s especially interesting here is that the gender gap is evident across all age groups — from 18 to 85-year-olds. Also, it shows up within all major racial, ethnic and marital-status groups.

For example — African-Americans and Asians are more Democratic than whites; but within each of these groups, women are more Democratic than men.

The poll also shows Democrats have their greatest advantage among baby boomers and the very young; and relatively speaking, are the weakest among people in their late 30s and those in their mid-to-late 60s.

Gallup says these findings suggest that by the time young men and women are 18 years old — the different cultural and social factors that determine party identification are already well established.

Here’s my question to you: Why are women more likely to be Democrats?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (96)

PLAYS: (312)

From The Cafferty File:

Sarah Palin didn’t make a speech — but that didn’t stop her from stealing the show at a big Republican fundraising dinner in Washington last night. The Alaska governor’s appearance was a question mark up until the last minute… and followed weeks of an on-again, off-again saga.

Palin had originally been announced as the keynote speaker, but her office said she never confirmed the attendance. Later they wanted to know if she would speak at the dinner; party leaders said she could but then took back the invitation… worried that Palin would upstage Newt Gingrich, the new keynote speaker. Lots of drama.

But Palin, along with her husband Todd, got big cheers from the audience when they were introduced onstage last night; and their table was the only one in the ballroom with a crowd around it.

Several Republicans thanked Palin for showing up. Senator John McCain said it was great to see her, Senator Jon Cornyn praised Palin’s leadership, and Gingrich said the U.S. “would be amazingly better off” had McCain and Palin been elected.

There’s been speculation that both Gingrich and Palin might be interested in running for the White House in 2012. A recent poll among Republicans showed 21 percent backing Palin and 13 percent backing Gingrich.

Here’s my question to you: Would you rather listen to Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich make a speech?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (125)

PLAYS: (376)

From the Cafferty File:

Here’s something that probably keeps the leadership of the Republican Party up at night: A new Gallup poll shows 89 percent of the party’s rank-and-file members are white.

This leaves only 11 percent of Republicans who are Hispanics, African-Americans or members of other races. These numbers are staggering and hardly in keeping with the radically changing face of the U.S.

That’s not all — by more than two-to-one, whites who call themselves Republicans claim a conservative ideology, and about half of them say they’re strongly religious.

Compare that to Democrats — whose party is 64% white and 36 percent non-white. By a ratio of more than four-to-one, white Democrats call themselves moderate or liberal, and only 20 percent of them say they’re highly religious.

Independents land somewhere between the two camps — with 27 percent non-whites.

These numbers pretty much say it all about the GOP’s troubles; and leave little question why Democrats are in control of the White House and both houses of Congress.

The big question: Will the support of white, conservative, religious Americans be enough of a base for Republicans to start winning elections again? Probably not. The alternative is for Republicans to find a way to broaden their appeal among non-whites and whites who are more moderate.

And here’s a hint: The way to accomplish that is probably not with the likes of Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich slinging around negative and hateful rhetoric.

Here’s my question to you: Why does the Republican Party have such a narrow appeal?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (103)

PLAYS: (216)

From the Cafferty File:

While Former Vice President Dick Cheney hasn’t been able to keep his mouth shut since leaving office, the former president has been largely silent. Until last night that is.

Speaking in Michigan, George W. Bush repeated Cheney’s claim that the enhanced interrogation program — what some people call “torture” — was legal and helped get valuable information that prevented more terror attacks… and saved lives.

The former president told the crowd of 2,500 people that after 9-11, he vowed to take quote “whatever steps were necessary to protect you.” Bush said after the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he wanted to determine what means were legal to get information from the terror suspect.

Although Bush’s message might be similar to Cheney’s, the tone is very different. Bush repeatedly insisted that he doesn’t want to criticize Pres. Obama and he didn’t specifically refer to the debate over the new president’s decision to stop using harsh interrogation techniques.

In a departure from how these kind of events were handled before, Bush answered questions directly from the audience for almost an hour – instead of responding to questions that had been submitted ahead of time.

When asked what he wants his legacy to be, Bush said, “The man showed up with a set of principles, and he was unwilling to compromise his soul for the sake of popularity.”

Here’s my question to you: Have your feelings toward former President Bush softened any now that’s he’s been out of office for four months?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (139)

PLAYS: (319)

From the Cafferty File:

Republicans are in yet another tough spot – this one when it comes to the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States. Chalk up another brilliant bit of political strategy to our new president.

President Obama’s nominee would be the first Hispanic justice — and only the third woman justice — in the history of the nation’s highest court.

Conservative critics are branding her as a liberal activist judge, and are pointing to her past comments. In 2001, Sotomayor said, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

Rush Limbaugh calls Sotomayor a “reverse racist” and “an affirmative action case extraordinaire” who puts down white men in favor of Latina women.

But the White House is defending the judge’s comments, saying taken in context, what she says is “very much common sense in terms of different experiences, different people.”

Another comment getting attention came in 2005 when Sotomayor said, “a court of appeals is where policy is made.”

Republican senators say she will need to prove her commitment to impartiality, but RNC Chairman Michael Steele warns that if his party hopes to include more Hispanics, they have to be careful about how they approach Sotomayor.

The bottom line here is barring some unforeseen scandal, Sotomayor’s confirmation will likely sail through the Senate with Republicans afraid to challenge it for fear of alienating Hispanic voters.

Here’s my question to you: Will Republicans dare to vote against the first Hispanic woman nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court?

Continue reading »