I don't know how I can bring myself to write anything cogent about Catholic League President (of himself) Bill Donohue's cartoonishly predictable views on marriage in the marriage equality debate and the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church on sexual matters and covering up their own sex scandals after hearing John Fugelsang use the phrase "putting your penis in a kid's mouth". How can you follow that?

But bully for John Fugelsang for pointing out Bill Donohue's hypocrisy of holding up Leviticus for hating on the gays.

“The whole purpose of marriage is to have a family,” he said. “It’s not about making people happy. It’s not about love.”

Fugelsang repeatedly pressed Donohue to explain where Jesus preaches anything about “treating our gay friends like second-class citizens.” The host also pointed out that the Catholic leader is a hypocrite for demanding we follow a Leviticus passage that prohibits “lying with another man,” yet he doesn’t refrain from eating pork or from wearing shirts with mixed fibers.

“I think there’s a little bit of difference between what kind of shirt I buy and two guys having anal sex,” Donohue dismissed.

(h/t Dave at VideoCafe)

I've been covering the Sunday news shows for almost eight years now. I've mocked; I've cajoled; I've thrown shoes at the television. True to the name of the site, we document the talking points, the evaded questions, the lack of follow up. And thanks to you readers, we've carved ourselves a successful little niche in the blogosphere.

But sometimes, only comedians can show us the truth by holding up the mirror to the ridiculousness that passes for news media today.

On Current TV's Viewpoint, comedians John Fugelsang and Frank Conniff (TV's Frank of MST3K fame) re-enact, right down to the orange of Boehner's skin, the travesty of the John Boehner/David Gregory interview from last Sunday's Meet the Press. It was a simply brilliant parody of two Beltway denizens, comfortable with their respective lack of accountability, uninterested in offering solutions and oblivious to both the disgust and the pain of anyone outside their cocktail circuit:

"Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask you some very tough questions, followed up by some very limp follow ups," Conniff said as Gregory.

In character as Boehner, Fugelsang asserted that Senate Democrats had not passed plant to avert automatic spending cuts in the so-called sequester, part of a 2011 deal Democrats made with Republicans cut $85 billion and raise the debt ceiling.

"Well, this is where I should bring up that Senate Democrats tried that and got filibustered, but instead, I'm going to ask about revenues," the Gregory character remarked.

"Spending is out of control and I was born in a tavern," Fugelsang quipped. "This president spends like me at Georgetown Applebee's at Happy Hour."

"This is where I'm not going to mention that you raised the debt ceiling seven times for George W. Bush," Conniff noted, lampooning Gregory.

"If you don't change the subject then I'm going to keep saying 'sequester'," Fugelsang grumbled. "If you ask a follow-up question, I'm going to say the word 'Benghazi.'"

"David, haven't you learned by now, you can have information or you have have access," the Current TV host added in his Boehner voice.

After eight years of doing this, this is EXACTLY what I hear when I watch the Sunday shows.

What no one explains is that this "shut up and sit down" Senate model is based on the not-unreasonable idea that new senators should develop some expertise in their area before they start making waves. But since Warren is one of the nation's leading experts on banking and financial services, it's absolutely silly to expect she wouldn't use her expertise from Day One. And, as Sirota points out, it's a double standard for progressives. Anyone telling Marco Rubio not to make waves? Via Raw Story:

Appearing with “The Young Turks” host Cenk Uygur on Tuesday, author David Sirota critiqued Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) recent grilling of the nation’s top financial regulators, saying it’s the first evidence we’ve seen that Warren is showing no interest in “the Hillary Clinton model” of sitting down and shutting in hopes of earning the right to be taken seriously.

“What’s un-serious is the notion that a senator shouldn’t ask serious questions about the biggest financial meltdown in contemporary history,” he said.

“When it comes to Democratic senators, what you hear is, ‘Please follow the Hillary Clinton model,’ that’s what it’s basically called,” Sirota said. “Hillary Clinton came in and she had star power and she laid low and didn’t do very much. Same thing for Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate. The expectation, if not the mandate for liberal senators is, only can you be taken seriously if you follow this model that says essentially, sit down and shut up.”

DOWNLOADS: (125)

PLAYS: (798)

Embed

You know how Fox Newsies are such champions of the First Amendment that they are always on the lookout for attempts to stifle diversity in the press? That zeal for free expression has flown out the window with the news that Al Jazeera English plans to expand in the United States. And whether out of fear or just because they love their hateration, Fox pundits are doing their best to make you think that Al Jazeera is nothing less than an Al Qaeda sleeper cell.

Yesterday, a Fox News contributor blatantly suggested that Al Jazeera was somehow (without bothering to give the details or evidence about how) connected with Muslim sleeper cells in Detroit. This morning, Michelle Malkin called the Qatar-based network “a half-billion dollar Trojan horse for Terror TV.” Host Steve Doocy thought it was not a matter of if, but how overtly the pro-Islam/anti-American agenda would be promoted.

As Malkin spoke, the screen conveniently split to show a photo of Al Gore, whose sale of Current TV to Al Jazeera is bringing about its expansion, standing under an Al Jazeera logo. (Just in case we had failed to associate Gore with these ENEMIES OF AMERICA!!!)

Malkin’s eyes bulged as she urged viewers to beware of the jihadism on its way to our shores under cover of objective reporting:

They’re hiring so-called investigative reporters now at all of these bureaus and they’re going to have an expansive reach into American homes. And I think it’s incumbent upon those of us who are very familiar with how Al Jazeera abroad has cheerleaded for terror that has taken American lives that they know who these people side with.

…Inevitably the mask will slip and we can all put on our shocked faces when it does.

Doocy added, "It’ll be interesting to see exactly when you turn it on, what it’ll feel like. I mean, will it feel like the Al Jazeera that you watch over in the Middle East or will it just be some homogenized thing that has a very subtle message?"

If you think there’s even a shred of honest concern being voiced here, then you must check out the anti-American screed Jon Stewart found from Rotana – the Saudi conglomerate connected to - you guessed it, Fox News.

DOWNLOADS: (439)

PLAYS: (4501)

Embed

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (74)

PLAYS: (629)

Embed

If you're Al Gore and you own 20 percent of Current TV, and Current TV is sold to Al Jazeera, which is owned by Qatar's royal family, and Qatar's royal family also profits from oil trading, have you sold out the cause of global warming?

That's the question Howie Kurtz brought up on Reliable Sources this morning. I think it's a manufactured issue, but Dana Milbank begs to differ, saying "[H]e's been a big spokesman on global warming, a principled man and now he is this big, fat target." Continuing his rant, Milbank said Gore is "worth $300 million more than Mitt Romney and basically he's seen as a guy now who enriched himself, rather than advancing his cause -- opening up to the criticism of people like this global warming denier."

The Blaze writer Amy Holmes was predictably banal in her response, claiming Gore has "been telling the rest of the world to, you know, restrain and constrain our spending while he personally is becoming a wealthier man through, you know, his attack on Mother Nature."

What does that even mean? Does anyone think Al Gore bought Current TV in order to further his cause around global warming --so he could make a boatload of money on climate change? Really?

Finally, what does Mitt Romney's wealth have to do with it, anyway? Gore's wealth has come from sitting on the boards of Google and Apple after he left public office. He cashed in. Did anyone decide he was insincere about global warming because of those affiliations?

Gore and his partner Joel Hyatt bought a struggling cable network for $70 million in 2004. When Current was sold in 2013 for a price reported to be about $500 million, Gore's profit would be 20 percent of that sale price, less any financing that may have been obtained between 2004 and 2013. I have no idea what those financing arrangements might have been, but they either financed or else put their own funds in over the years in order to keep the doors open on what wasn't a particularly profitable enterprise.

For its part, Al Jazeera needed a channel with carriers. They have online traction, but were having difficulty finding cable carriers that would include their channel. By purchasing Current, they hoped to use Current's position as a channel already carried to build a news network competitive with CNN, which might explain why Time-Warner cable dropped Current the day the deal was announced.

I'm sure Comcast will follow suit, because when you own everything from cable to internet to pipeline to content creators, why bother with any voices you don't like?

At any rate, I'm having a great deal of difficulty connecting his sale of Current TV to Al Jazeera with a sellout of his credibility on climate change. I also don't view him as the sole authority on the question, but he is one who has credibility simply because he has been passionate and has put his money where his mouth is.

Continue reading »

I'm torn, because I really like Current and was hopeful they'd continue to expand the progressive market. But I do like Al Jazeera's coverage, and I'm happy that a deep-pockets company will be challenging the corporate pap that makes up so much of cable news. Some real coverage of Israeli/Palestian issues sure would be a change of pace:

Al Jazeera on Wednesday completed a deal to take over Current TV, the low-rated cable channel that was founded by Al Gore and his business partners seven years ago.

Current will provide the pan-Arab news giant with something it has sought for years: a pathway into American living rooms. Current is available in about 60 million of the 100 million homes in the United States with cable or satellite service.

Rather than simply use Current to distribute its English-language channel, called Al Jazeera English and based in Doha, Qatar, Al Jazeera will create a new channel, called Al Jazeera America, based in New York. Roughly 60 percent of the programming will be produced in the United States, while the remaining 40 percent will come from Al Jazeera English.

Continue reading »

It is clear that President Obama's messaging is not working and that he's missing some huge opportunities to call out the ridiculous fantasy of Romney's economic plan when most Americans polled trust Romney to handle the deficit more than Obama. Any sentient being who employs even basic thinking skills should be able to see that Romney and Ryan's economic plans are simply mathematically impossible, but yet, that computation isn't coming through.

Matt Taibbi sees it too and wonders what will it take to wake up Americans:

I've never thought much of Joe Biden. But man, did he get it right in last night's debate, and not just because he walloped sniveling little Paul Ryan on the facts. What he got absolutely right, despite what you might read this morning (many outlets are criticizing Biden's dramatic excesses), was his tone. Biden did absolutely roll his eyes, snort, laugh derisively and throw his hands up in the air whenever Ryan trotted out his little beady-eyed BS-isms.

But he should have! He was absolutely right to be doing it. We all should be doing it. That includes all of us in the media, and not just paid obnoxious-opinion-merchants like me, but so-called "objective" news reporters as well. We should all be rolling our eyes, and scoffing and saying, "Come back when you're serious."

The load of balls that both Romney and Ryan have been pushing out there for this whole election season is simply not intellectually serious. Most of their platform isn't even a real platform, it's a fourth-rate parlor trick designed to paper over the real agenda – cutting taxes even more for super-rich dickheads like Mitt Romney, and getting everyone else to pay the bill.

Taibbi tells Eliot Spitzer that the media needs to pushback hard and demand answers. Yeah well, good luck with that. The media has been enabling Romney and Ryan from the beginning. Think they're gonna actually do their job now?

DOWNLOADS: (144)

PLAYS: (1963)

Embed

I wonder when New Jersey voters are going to realize that Gov. Chris Christie is really not all that charming. Witness his exchange here with a reporter:

As ThinkProgress has reported, several states took their share of the $25 billion foreclosure fraud settlement and used it to balance their budgetsinstead of providing help to homeowners. New Jersey is one of those states, where Gov. Chris Christieplunked the money into the state’s general fund, not specifically earmarking it for foreclosure prevention.

And that isn’t the only way in which Christie is keeping aid from getting to homeowners who need it. According to a report by WABC’s Jim Hoffer, another pot of federal money delivered to the Garden State to prevent foreclosure has gone largely unused:

Two years ago, New Jersey received $300 million from the federal government to help the unemployed from losing their homes.

The state used that money to create the “Homekeeper Loan” program. [...]

Data Eyewitness News obtained show since 2010, Homekeeper has only approved 498 families for foreclosure assistance, but nearly 2,000 homeowners have been denied help.

In fact, less than $4-million of the $300-million has been spent, ranking New Jersey last among 18 recipient states in giving out these emergency foreclosure funds.

Christie blew off Hoffer’s question about the program during a press conference, telling Hoffer “don’t show up once in a blue moon and think you’re going to dominate my press conference.”

NJ ranks No. 2 in the nation with seriously delinquent mortgages. Tra la!

DOWNLOADS: (224)

PLAYS: (774)

Embed

It's about time some of these organizations got the evil eye from the IRS. Common Cause has filed a request with the IRS for them to take a long look at whether or not ALEC has reached beyond the constraints of their tax-exempt status. This follows a front-page feature article from the New York Times about ALEC and their activities, showing them to be nothing more than stealth lobbyists for corporations.

Via Think Progress:

ALEC, the “association for conservative state lawmakers who shared a common belief in limited government, free markets, federalism, and individual liberty,” has pushed an extreme legislative agenda in states across the country, pushing shoot-first” “stand your ground” laws and voter suppression efforts. In recent weeks, at least a dozen companies announced they would no longer fund ALEC — following pressure from a Color of Change national campaign — and ALEC announced it would refocus its efforts away from “non-economic issues.” Last week, the group’s Louisiana state chairman resigned from the group.

Now, Common Cause is asking the Internal Revenue Service to take action; the group is requesting the agency audit ALEC’s work, impose penalties, and compel payment of back taxes. Common Cause President Bob Edgar (a former Democratic U.S. Rep. from Pennsylvania) said the group is masquerading as a public charity.

As a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt “charitable” organization, donations to the group are tax-deductible. But IRS rules state that (c)(3)s must “not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests” and “may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities.”ALEC claims its work is not lobbying. But, Edgar argues, ALEC’s mission “is to bring together corporations and state legislators to draft profit-driven, anti-public-interest legislation, and then help those elected officials pass the bills in statehouses from coast to coast. If that’s not lobbying, what is?”

This would be a good time for all tax-exempt political/ideological organizations to take a hard look at what they're doing and how they're doing it, because I have a sense this is only the beginning of the wars over tax-exempt status. It's about time. Let's have a closer look at some church organizations, too.