It's not as if these days weren't predicted; expected, even. After the mid-term elections in November gave the Republicans a majority in the House and an even better bargaining position in the Senate this January, it was obvious that President Obama would have to compromise on his positions to insure that Republicans didn't hold up Congress and shut down government until they got their way. What wasn't so obvious was that Republicans were willing to hold the middle-class hostage until their demands for tax cuts for the wealthy were met.
Three weeks ago House Republicans blocked a bill that would have extended unemployment insurance benefits expiring at the end of November and since then they have blocked the bill each time it's been brought up for a vote. Their reason? The Republican party made it clear that they would block all legislation in the lame-duck session until the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, set to expire at the end of the year, were extended.
Last week, Republicans in the Senate were successful in also blocking a Democratic plan to extend the Bush tax cuts to the middle-class. The middle-class tax cuts had been passed by the Democrats in the House just a few days before, prompting Republican Rep. John Boehner to call the vote to extend tax cuts to the middle-class and not to the wealthiest of Americans, 'chicken crap.'
Republicans have not only made good on their promise in blocking the extension of tax cuts for the middle-class: essentially raising taxes on 98 percent of Americans next month and blocking the extension of unemployment benefits: leaving up to two million out-of-work people without help by the end of the year, Republicans have also succeeded in holding up other legislation including the new START treaty, the Dream Act, and the Defense Authorization bill which in addition to outlining military funding includes the effective repeal of the discriminatory policy known as 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'
Obviously, the Dream Act and the repeal of DADT are not causes championed by most Republicans. Even though these measures would strengthen our military and finally plant the flag declaring this country's claim to the moral high ground, most Republicans are sure to stand in the way of these bills passing because, frankly, most Republicans don't really seem to like gays or brown people. But that Republicans would decide to hold up the new START treaty, an agreement with Russia to reduce and control nuclear arms, in order to scare Democrats into voting for upper-class tax cuts should tell you right away that if the G.O.P. is willing to undermine national security for the sake of fattening rich people's wallets, they'll do just about anything.
Republican obstructionist and bullying tactics have forced President Obama to choose his battles. With time running out on the middle-class and the unemployed, the President has decided to negotiate with Rep. John Boehner and Senator Mitch McConnell and propose a plan of extending unemployment benefits for thirteen months in exchange for twenty-four more months of Bush tax cuts, plus a two percent payroll tax reduction, plus an estate tax reduction, plus a tax exemption for inherited income up to $5 million dollars.
In all, as most Democrats and the liberal and progressive base have pointed out in various ways including an eight and a half hour filibuster-esque speech by Vermont's Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, this deal between President Obama and the G.O.P. is not exactly a fair or reasonable trade.
The left objects to the plan's over-generous concessions for the wealthy and are angry with the President for breaking his pledge to eliminate tax cuts for the rich, while the right objects to the expense of unemployment benefits, but both the Democrats and the Republicans agree that the plan means a huge, unaffordable increase in the national debt.
The tax deal, estimated to cost $858 billion dollars, is $71 billion more than the heavily criticized 2009 stimulus and at a time when many in Washington had expected to roll up their sleeves and get to work at reducing the deficit, President Obama and Republican leaders are now urging Congress to pass this package under the threat that not passing it will further damage the fragile economy.
President Obama has put himself in the position of negotiator-in-chief between the two political parties: a place he believed he could work to bring red state and blue state America together. But after two years of extending his hand to the Republican party, it seems President Obama has yet to notice that Republicans, at the very least, want nothing to do with him; at most, are eager to smack his hand away and spit in his eye. Republicans consider him an obstacle: avoid if possible, go over if necessary, remove eventually. If President Obama has a strategy in play; that he believes it's best to keep his enemies closer, he's not letting on. If he is willing to fight the Republicans or big business or Wall Street, he isn't showing it. And because of this, President Obama stands to lose the faith and support of his base.
But when facing a hostage crisis, what would his base expect the president to do?
Yes, Republicans are better than Democrats at standing their ground even if Republican's ground will be proven in time to be on the wrong side of history and yes, their base loves them for it. Some may see President Obama's unfavorable compromise with Republicans as capitulation to the enemy and a sign of weakness, but it is important to remember that showing empathy is not cowardice. Choosing to save those in distress rather than fighting the bad guy does not make the good guy weak. And yes, it is possible that, rather than always fighting, compromise with the opposition can lead to cooperation. It may not be sweet and it may not be easy, but being the good guy rarely is. All you can do is stay tough and live to fight another day.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Thursday, December 2, 2010
House Democrats pass Middle-class tax cuts while Republicans cry fowl
I wrote in my last post how Republicans in Congress were making a mistake in favoring the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for the 2 percent of Americans who make over $200,000 ($250,000 for families) instead of extending Unemployment Benefits. Now that Republicans have succeeded in blocking that extension, leaving 2 million Americans this holiday season without those benefits by the end of the year, they are free to again focus on their highest priority: giving more money to the wealthy.
After sitting down with Republican leaders in what was called the 'Slurpee Summit,' President Obama met House Minority Leader, John Boehner, and Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell in agreement that they must work to meet 'common ground.' President Obama addressed the media after the meeting promising to work with the Republicans, conceding that perhaps he hasn't been as forthcoming in efforts to reach out and work with them in the past.
That all sounds nice and consolatory for people at home, but is the President serious? Democrats will likely reach out to Republicans in the spirit of compromise, as they have done, but as for the direction and tone of the Republican party, you can expect business as usual. The Republicans have already proclaimed that they not willing to compromise on anything.
Less then a day after that meeting, where it was agreed that both parties would work together to seek 'common ground,' Republicans have dug in their heels and announced that they will block all legislation in the lame-duck session of Congress including the START Treaty, the Dream Act, and the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Democratic leaders in the House carried through on their plan to hold a vote Thursday on extending just the Bush-era tax cuts for the middle-class. The measure is mostly a symbolic one; the bill passed the House, but will likely die in the Senate as Democrats do not have the sixty-vote supermajority, but Democrats want it to be on record that they support tax cuts for 98 percent of working Americans, while Republicans loyalty is to the very wealthy.
John Boehner, incoming Speaker of the House, called the Democrats plan for the vote a "chicken crap" political game. Attempting to spin the vote as a sign that Democrats are playing class warfare, Boehner and other Republicans are denying their part in the war on the middle-class. Still, the vote changes nothing. The debate over the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts is far from over. The 2001 tax cuts are set to expire at the end of the year unless Congress acts to extend all or part of them.
The White House is still in negotiations with the Republican leaders who are holding the middle-class tax cuts hostage, and many Democrats are asking themselves whether President Obama intends to abandon his pledge of ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich as a good faith gesture to the Republican party in hopes that Republicans will be more open to working on items in the lame-duck session including extending unemployment benefits.
Does President Obama somehow think he can score political brownie points by working with the party that openly seeks his failure and removal from office? Instead of standing up for his own base and staying committed to his campaign pledges, is the President willing to aid and abet the Republicans in their efforts to destroy the middle-class and hand this country over to millionaires and billionaires in exchange for John Boehner’s and Mitch McConnell’s word that they will be open to compromise in the future?
President Obama, sir, it’s not worth it. Their word is worthless.
After sitting down with Republican leaders in what was called the 'Slurpee Summit,' President Obama met House Minority Leader, John Boehner, and Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell in agreement that they must work to meet 'common ground.' President Obama addressed the media after the meeting promising to work with the Republicans, conceding that perhaps he hasn't been as forthcoming in efforts to reach out and work with them in the past.
That all sounds nice and consolatory for people at home, but is the President serious? Democrats will likely reach out to Republicans in the spirit of compromise, as they have done, but as for the direction and tone of the Republican party, you can expect business as usual. The Republicans have already proclaimed that they not willing to compromise on anything.
Less then a day after that meeting, where it was agreed that both parties would work together to seek 'common ground,' Republicans have dug in their heels and announced that they will block all legislation in the lame-duck session of Congress including the START Treaty, the Dream Act, and the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Democratic leaders in the House carried through on their plan to hold a vote Thursday on extending just the Bush-era tax cuts for the middle-class. The measure is mostly a symbolic one; the bill passed the House, but will likely die in the Senate as Democrats do not have the sixty-vote supermajority, but Democrats want it to be on record that they support tax cuts for 98 percent of working Americans, while Republicans loyalty is to the very wealthy.
John Boehner, incoming Speaker of the House, called the Democrats plan for the vote a "chicken crap" political game. Attempting to spin the vote as a sign that Democrats are playing class warfare, Boehner and other Republicans are denying their part in the war on the middle-class. Still, the vote changes nothing. The debate over the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts is far from over. The 2001 tax cuts are set to expire at the end of the year unless Congress acts to extend all or part of them.
The White House is still in negotiations with the Republican leaders who are holding the middle-class tax cuts hostage, and many Democrats are asking themselves whether President Obama intends to abandon his pledge of ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich as a good faith gesture to the Republican party in hopes that Republicans will be more open to working on items in the lame-duck session including extending unemployment benefits.
Does President Obama somehow think he can score political brownie points by working with the party that openly seeks his failure and removal from office? Instead of standing up for his own base and staying committed to his campaign pledges, is the President willing to aid and abet the Republicans in their efforts to destroy the middle-class and hand this country over to millionaires and billionaires in exchange for John Boehner’s and Mitch McConnell’s word that they will be open to compromise in the future?
President Obama, sir, it’s not worth it. Their word is worthless.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Damned if you do, damned if you don't
After successfully rescuing the economy from tumbling off a cliff into another Great Depression and overseeing ten straight months of private sector job growth equaling more jobs gained than in the entire eight years under George W. Bush, President Obama and Congressional Democrats still can't get any respect. The Right, Republicans and Tea Partiers, are all too happy to blame the President and his allies for their part in the Stimulus plans and 'bailouts' of the auto industry, banks, and Wall Street even if in the end they saved jobs, made profits, and boosted spending.
Even though government efforts like the Stimulus saved and created 1.4 to 3.6 million jobs last quarter, the Gross Domestic Product increased 1.7 percent, and the economy grew by an annual 2.5 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office; even though consumer spending grew 2.8 percent last quarter, the most in nearly four years, the Right will be quick to point out that 'spending money to make money' with the Stimulus and TARP raised our deficit. And even though the pace of job loss has slowed considerably over the last two years and unemployment rates have fallen in 23 states this last month, the Right will be just as quick to point out the national unemployment rate remains arguably high above 9 percent.
The state of the economy is improving under President Obama, but it's just not improving quickly enough for some and the efforts to improve it are constantly criticized by the Right. Despite positive growth in private sector jobs and the GDP, the Right continues to denounce the Bush and Obama TARP and the Stimulus Acts meant to revive the economy as spending bills that 'tax our children and grandchildren' apparently believing it would have been better for their children and grandchildren to be in a Great Depression. The Right contrarily rails against government loans to banks, auto makers, and Wall Street calling them 'bailouts' at the same time rails against government intervention in business in the form of regulation at the same time demands government accountability for job creation.
A rough economy and high unemployment always spells doom for the party in power. Two years of a Democratic President during tough times, even if things are steadily improving, means the Republicans will benefit from a beleaguered nation. Therein lies the rub. It's actually in the Republicans best interest to see the economy, and the nation, suffer.
The outsourcing of American jobs to other countries is damaging our economy yet Senate Republicans, along with a few Democrats including Connecticut's Lieberman and Virginia's Warner, voted to block a bill that would end tax incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas. Tax breaks, regarded by Republicans to be the best way to stimulate economic growth, was voted down by Republicans in the Senate when Democrats proposed a bill that would grant tax breaks and free up lending to small businesses. Consumer spending on household goods accounts for roughly two-thirds of our economy and unemployment benefits puts money in the hands of people who will spend it, yet House Republicans blocked the extension of unemployment benefits.
Instead of backing any Democratic effort to boost the economy, even if they have done so in the past, Republicans are focused on one plan: the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. While President Obama and Democrats support extending middle class tax cuts to individuals making less than $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers), Republicans want all the Bush tax cuts extended including those to the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans who without the tax cut would only see their taxes go up at most, 4.6 percent. Although the Right raises objections to increasing the deficit with Stimulus plans, government loans, and unemployment benefit extensions, they are fired up to add $700 billion more in debt to finance tax cuts for the rich that have proved disastrous to our economy in the decade since President Bush enacted them.
Favoring the Bush tax cuts over the extension of unemployment benefits makes no economic sense even to John McCain's former economic adviser, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics. According to Zandi's testimony before the Senate Finance Committee for every dollar spent on making the Bush tax cuts permanent there is an $.32 increase in the GDP whereas for every dollar spent to extend unemployment benefits there is an $1.61 increase in the GDP. In other words, according to Zandi, a dollar spent on unemployment compensation gets five times more "Bang for the Buck" to the GDP than a tax cut for the rich.
Republicans and Tea Party Republicans who ran in this year's elections on the slogan: 'it's the economy, stupid,' now find themselves having to state their positions on the economy in ways that often sound confusing, contradictory, and plain stupid.
In spite of positive growth in the economy, the strange backlash against the policies responsible for that growth, put in place by the President and the Congressional Democrats, favored the Right in the elections. If the dominant thought in the minds of voters was, 'where are the jobs?' then the thought in the minds of President Obama and Democrats must have been, 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' and Republicans are happy to have it both ways.
Even though government efforts like the Stimulus saved and created 1.4 to 3.6 million jobs last quarter, the Gross Domestic Product increased 1.7 percent, and the economy grew by an annual 2.5 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office; even though consumer spending grew 2.8 percent last quarter, the most in nearly four years, the Right will be quick to point out that 'spending money to make money' with the Stimulus and TARP raised our deficit. And even though the pace of job loss has slowed considerably over the last two years and unemployment rates have fallen in 23 states this last month, the Right will be just as quick to point out the national unemployment rate remains arguably high above 9 percent.
The state of the economy is improving under President Obama, but it's just not improving quickly enough for some and the efforts to improve it are constantly criticized by the Right. Despite positive growth in private sector jobs and the GDP, the Right continues to denounce the Bush and Obama TARP and the Stimulus Acts meant to revive the economy as spending bills that 'tax our children and grandchildren' apparently believing it would have been better for their children and grandchildren to be in a Great Depression. The Right contrarily rails against government loans to banks, auto makers, and Wall Street calling them 'bailouts' at the same time rails against government intervention in business in the form of regulation at the same time demands government accountability for job creation.
A rough economy and high unemployment always spells doom for the party in power. Two years of a Democratic President during tough times, even if things are steadily improving, means the Republicans will benefit from a beleaguered nation. Therein lies the rub. It's actually in the Republicans best interest to see the economy, and the nation, suffer.
The outsourcing of American jobs to other countries is damaging our economy yet Senate Republicans, along with a few Democrats including Connecticut's Lieberman and Virginia's Warner, voted to block a bill that would end tax incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas. Tax breaks, regarded by Republicans to be the best way to stimulate economic growth, was voted down by Republicans in the Senate when Democrats proposed a bill that would grant tax breaks and free up lending to small businesses. Consumer spending on household goods accounts for roughly two-thirds of our economy and unemployment benefits puts money in the hands of people who will spend it, yet House Republicans blocked the extension of unemployment benefits.
Instead of backing any Democratic effort to boost the economy, even if they have done so in the past, Republicans are focused on one plan: the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. While President Obama and Democrats support extending middle class tax cuts to individuals making less than $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers), Republicans want all the Bush tax cuts extended including those to the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans who without the tax cut would only see their taxes go up at most, 4.6 percent. Although the Right raises objections to increasing the deficit with Stimulus plans, government loans, and unemployment benefit extensions, they are fired up to add $700 billion more in debt to finance tax cuts for the rich that have proved disastrous to our economy in the decade since President Bush enacted them.
Favoring the Bush tax cuts over the extension of unemployment benefits makes no economic sense even to John McCain's former economic adviser, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics. According to Zandi's testimony before the Senate Finance Committee for every dollar spent on making the Bush tax cuts permanent there is an $.32 increase in the GDP whereas for every dollar spent to extend unemployment benefits there is an $1.61 increase in the GDP. In other words, according to Zandi, a dollar spent on unemployment compensation gets five times more "Bang for the Buck" to the GDP than a tax cut for the rich.
Republicans and Tea Party Republicans who ran in this year's elections on the slogan: 'it's the economy, stupid,' now find themselves having to state their positions on the economy in ways that often sound confusing, contradictory, and plain stupid.
In spite of positive growth in the economy, the strange backlash against the policies responsible for that growth, put in place by the President and the Congressional Democrats, favored the Right in the elections. If the dominant thought in the minds of voters was, 'where are the jobs?' then the thought in the minds of President Obama and Democrats must have been, 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' and Republicans are happy to have it both ways.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
If Only Obama Was Just A Little More Like Bush
Yes, it would seem that Obama squandered these two years, but a lot as gotten done and things have gotten somewhat better. While most people can express disappointment in the President: the Right that never would have accepted him - those that think the economy could be easily turned around, those that believe the lies in the media, and those that scoff at his accomplishments; while the Left who haven't gotten what they voted for - wanted Bush and Co. prosecuted for war crimes, wanted the wars to end immediately, wanted more from Health Care Reform, wanted tougher Wall Street Reform, wanted an end to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," wanted an end to Bush's tax cuts for the ridiculously wealthy, etc.
Unfortunately, the economy and the wars aren't easily solved problems and the Republicans never had any intention of working with Obama on legislation that could have made him popular. The President was so full of 'Hope' that he fooled himself into thinking he could work with Republicans in a bi-partisan way. Republicans spent two years playing politics, holding up bills in congress, 'compromising' by weakening the bills that did pass, and spent billions of dollars from corporate interests on attacks from Fox News/ conservative radio, and phony grassroots movements like the Tea Party to rile up the ignorant.
Most people pay little attention to politics (or news, in general) and most elections are about voting the bums in power out (mostly what 2008 was about as well). Republicans didn't win the House because they have better ideas - they just want to go back to Bush policies. Democrats lost because the disenchanted left stayed home and the voters who did turn out thought Democrats didn't do enough to fix the mess Bush left because Obama and the Democrats failed to properly communicate that the lack of progress over these last two years is due to the Republicans who think it is a bigger priority to play party politics for the sake of elections rather than focusing on solutions that this country in crisis urgently needs.
The election won't change much in Washington though. Republicans will only have slightly more power in January, so the next two years will likely be more of the same - gridlock stalling progress, while more vocal nonsense about repealing bills and impeachment. The difference now is, with Republicans controlling the House, if they disappointment their base (aka Tea Party) or if they don't make good on lowering debt or creating jobs, they'll be the bums thrown out in 2012.
If the country was actually excited to vote for the Republicans, they would have won more than just the House of Representatives in this year's election. So how can Republicans somehow think they have a mandate and have the gall to demand Obama lean further to the right than the disappointingly right-of-center he has been this whole time? While Republicans openly claim their major goal is for Obama to be a one-term president and call for 'no compromise' in extending Bush's tax cuts or undoing Social Security and reform after reform, Obama continues to play the nice guy at risk of losing his base by saying he is willing to work with the people who want to run him out of office, and in some cases, out of the country or up a tree branch.
The one good thing I can say about Dubya is that he at least maintained his base by standing firm for what he believed in (even though he was usually wrong). Obama's fault is that he is trying to make all the people happy all of the time.
Unfortunately, the economy and the wars aren't easily solved problems and the Republicans never had any intention of working with Obama on legislation that could have made him popular. The President was so full of 'Hope' that he fooled himself into thinking he could work with Republicans in a bi-partisan way. Republicans spent two years playing politics, holding up bills in congress, 'compromising' by weakening the bills that did pass, and spent billions of dollars from corporate interests on attacks from Fox News/ conservative radio, and phony grassroots movements like the Tea Party to rile up the ignorant.
Most people pay little attention to politics (or news, in general) and most elections are about voting the bums in power out (mostly what 2008 was about as well). Republicans didn't win the House because they have better ideas - they just want to go back to Bush policies. Democrats lost because the disenchanted left stayed home and the voters who did turn out thought Democrats didn't do enough to fix the mess Bush left because Obama and the Democrats failed to properly communicate that the lack of progress over these last two years is due to the Republicans who think it is a bigger priority to play party politics for the sake of elections rather than focusing on solutions that this country in crisis urgently needs.
The election won't change much in Washington though. Republicans will only have slightly more power in January, so the next two years will likely be more of the same - gridlock stalling progress, while more vocal nonsense about repealing bills and impeachment. The difference now is, with Republicans controlling the House, if they disappointment their base (aka Tea Party) or if they don't make good on lowering debt or creating jobs, they'll be the bums thrown out in 2012.
If the country was actually excited to vote for the Republicans, they would have won more than just the House of Representatives in this year's election. So how can Republicans somehow think they have a mandate and have the gall to demand Obama lean further to the right than the disappointingly right-of-center he has been this whole time? While Republicans openly claim their major goal is for Obama to be a one-term president and call for 'no compromise' in extending Bush's tax cuts or undoing Social Security and reform after reform, Obama continues to play the nice guy at risk of losing his base by saying he is willing to work with the people who want to run him out of office, and in some cases, out of the country or up a tree branch.
The one good thing I can say about Dubya is that he at least maintained his base by standing firm for what he believed in (even though he was usually wrong). Obama's fault is that he is trying to make all the people happy all of the time.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Keith Olbermann: Putting His Money Where His Mouth Is
As Keith Olbermann would say, "Now for a quick comment..."
The whole weekend news cycle was wasted on the Friday announcement that Keith Olbermann, host of MSNBC's flagship Countdown, was suspended 'indefinitely' for his personal political contributions. Network chief-executive, Phil (not Peter) Griffin, suspended Olbermann when he discovered (by reading a Politico.com story containing completely not secret information) that Olbermann contributed $2,400 to each of three Democratic candidates running in this year's election.
According to first published reports, Griffin suspended Olbermann because MSNBC is apparently supposed to be viewed as impartial and a network personality 'jeopardizes objectivity' by contributing to political campaigns. Actually, that turned out to not be so important since it was clear that other on-air personalities at MSNBC, namely Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan, had donated to campaigns in the past. The 'real' reason then appeared to be that Olbermann was suspended for failing to 'ask for permission' before donating. Countdown went on the air Friday night with fill-in host, Thomas Roberts (who is bound to get his own show now) after normal fill-in, Chris Hayes from The Nation (also show host bound), was first announced to appear then apparently declined.
By Saturday, others in the media stood up for Olbermann and dozens of online and Facebook petitions popped up. Liberals and progressives rallied together to protest in outrage. Then some time was spent by pundits and bloggers to point out that Fox News is a Republican political tool and money-making machine and question why MSNBC couldn't be the same for Democrats. This is where the merger of Comcast and NBC comes in.
Back in July, Olbermann 'tweeted' an answer to a question regarding MSNBC's direction after the merger saying, "Yeah, they want to go more liberal." But after Olbermann's suspension, rumors started flying that Comcast's conservative leaning executives weren't happy with that position after all. It seemed that Griffin and the other suits must have been confused about which network they were running because it's no secret which side Olbermann leans and MSNBC's prime time is built around him with Maddow and O'Donnell, who both got shows thanks to stints filling in on Countdown. In fact, MSNBC even changed it's slogan to "Lean Forward" as they meant to embrace their position as the alternative to Fox News.
By Sunday, the reasoning for Olbermann's suspension changed to: 'Olbermann refused to apologize on-air for contributing to campaigns without asking for his boss's permission,' which just sounded like the big-bad corporate conservatives demanding the voice of the people to kneel before Zod. The bigger picture was that MSNBC sought to make a point that, unlike Fox News who is a corrupt political wing of the GOP, MSNBC is not and will not be a political tool for the Democratic party.
Monday morning's news that Keith Olbermann 'indefinite' suspension lasted all of two unpaid days and his return to Tuesday's Countdown is being called the 'shortest suspension ever,' but what if anything can be made from this? Any individual (or now, corporation) can donate to political campaigns and Olbermann's contributions were made privately without suggesting his audience do the same. In a statement, Olbermann explains: "I did not privately or publicly encourage anyone to donate to these campaigns nor to any others in this election or any previous ones, nor have I previously donated to any political campaign at any level." He also insists that he was not aware of the clause requiring him to seek pre-approval.
I understand rules are rules, but this 'offense of ethics' reasoning is ridiculous, especially if others on MSNBC, though, more blatantly on Fox News, are guilty of the same and go unpunished. The 'impartiality in journalism' line just doesn't carry much weight. While I agree this whole episode can stand to make a point that no one at Fox News has integrity or credibility, what difference does that make? We already know what Fox News is and the Fox News audience, who gladly takes their propaganda as gospel, can't be swayed by reason, fact, or ethics.
Maybe pundits and bloggers will now say that Keith Olbermann got a slap on the wrist, but what did he really do that was so wrong? Maybe some will even make comparisons to the firings of Rick Sanchez and Juan Williams, but that's nothing close to what has happened in this case. Olbermann's personal contributions to political campaigns cannot be compared to the Sanchez or Williams episodes because they were fired for their big mouthed bigoted views. Keith Olbermann is simply getting slammed by the conservative head honchos in corporate for literally putting his money where his mouth is, standing his ground on the side of right, and refusing to apologize. If only other liberals were as proud as he.
The whole weekend news cycle was wasted on the Friday announcement that Keith Olbermann, host of MSNBC's flagship Countdown, was suspended 'indefinitely' for his personal political contributions. Network chief-executive, Phil (not Peter) Griffin, suspended Olbermann when he discovered (by reading a Politico.com story containing completely not secret information) that Olbermann contributed $2,400 to each of three Democratic candidates running in this year's election.
According to first published reports, Griffin suspended Olbermann because MSNBC is apparently supposed to be viewed as impartial and a network personality 'jeopardizes objectivity' by contributing to political campaigns. Actually, that turned out to not be so important since it was clear that other on-air personalities at MSNBC, namely Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan, had donated to campaigns in the past. The 'real' reason then appeared to be that Olbermann was suspended for failing to 'ask for permission' before donating. Countdown went on the air Friday night with fill-in host, Thomas Roberts (who is bound to get his own show now) after normal fill-in, Chris Hayes from The Nation (also show host bound), was first announced to appear then apparently declined.
By Saturday, others in the media stood up for Olbermann and dozens of online and Facebook petitions popped up. Liberals and progressives rallied together to protest in outrage. Then some time was spent by pundits and bloggers to point out that Fox News is a Republican political tool and money-making machine and question why MSNBC couldn't be the same for Democrats. This is where the merger of Comcast and NBC comes in.
Back in July, Olbermann 'tweeted' an answer to a question regarding MSNBC's direction after the merger saying, "Yeah, they want to go more liberal." But after Olbermann's suspension, rumors started flying that Comcast's conservative leaning executives weren't happy with that position after all. It seemed that Griffin and the other suits must have been confused about which network they were running because it's no secret which side Olbermann leans and MSNBC's prime time is built around him with Maddow and O'Donnell, who both got shows thanks to stints filling in on Countdown. In fact, MSNBC even changed it's slogan to "Lean Forward" as they meant to embrace their position as the alternative to Fox News.
By Sunday, the reasoning for Olbermann's suspension changed to: 'Olbermann refused to apologize on-air for contributing to campaigns without asking for his boss's permission,' which just sounded like the big-bad corporate conservatives demanding the voice of the people to kneel before Zod. The bigger picture was that MSNBC sought to make a point that, unlike Fox News who is a corrupt political wing of the GOP, MSNBC is not and will not be a political tool for the Democratic party.
Monday morning's news that Keith Olbermann 'indefinite' suspension lasted all of two unpaid days and his return to Tuesday's Countdown is being called the 'shortest suspension ever,' but what if anything can be made from this? Any individual (or now, corporation) can donate to political campaigns and Olbermann's contributions were made privately without suggesting his audience do the same. In a statement, Olbermann explains: "I did not privately or publicly encourage anyone to donate to these campaigns nor to any others in this election or any previous ones, nor have I previously donated to any political campaign at any level." He also insists that he was not aware of the clause requiring him to seek pre-approval.
I understand rules are rules, but this 'offense of ethics' reasoning is ridiculous, especially if others on MSNBC, though, more blatantly on Fox News, are guilty of the same and go unpunished. The 'impartiality in journalism' line just doesn't carry much weight. While I agree this whole episode can stand to make a point that no one at Fox News has integrity or credibility, what difference does that make? We already know what Fox News is and the Fox News audience, who gladly takes their propaganda as gospel, can't be swayed by reason, fact, or ethics.
Maybe pundits and bloggers will now say that Keith Olbermann got a slap on the wrist, but what did he really do that was so wrong? Maybe some will even make comparisons to the firings of Rick Sanchez and Juan Williams, but that's nothing close to what has happened in this case. Olbermann's personal contributions to political campaigns cannot be compared to the Sanchez or Williams episodes because they were fired for their big mouthed bigoted views. Keith Olbermann is simply getting slammed by the conservative head honchos in corporate for literally putting his money where his mouth is, standing his ground on the side of right, and refusing to apologize. If only other liberals were as proud as he.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
The Morning After: Election Night Hangover
As I spent last night trying not to simultaneously cry and vomit having been both emotionally and physically drained of hope, I thought I should write a comment on the midterm elections. With my hands literally shaking, I started to write a long, rambling admonishment of the American voters who were stupid enough to fall for Republican bullshit - you know, how ‘Obama raised taxes’ when he factually lowered them, how the ‘Stimulus is a failure’ when it has factually helped, and how ‘Health Care Reform is a disaster’ when it factually will lower the deficit, provide health care to million who don’t have it, and, like everything else these last two years, is only less than perfect thanks to compromising with Republicans who made it their goal to sabotage everything President Obama worked on. But even though I enjoy ranting about how ignorant people are the bane of this country, I just can’t get that mad at people who are too scared and angry to think straight.
For us sane, sober Americans, election results may be a tad depressing, but they aren't much of a surprise. The bad news - the House is controlled by the Republicans with orange jackass, John Boehner, as speaker. The good news - most of the Tea Party candidates lost. Also, it shouldn’t come as a shock that states like Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Alaska, Alabama, Georgia, etc. went Red. Sure there may have been an upset or two; that’s how these midterm elections usually go, but it could have been worse. So, sing it with me - "Always look on the bright side of life!"
As far as the morning after explanations: Whack-jobs like Mike Huckabee want to make statements like, “Obama overreached with his far left agenda and America is letting him know it”, but Mike Huckabee and others think anything close to center is too far left for them. Seriously, Huckster? Far left agenda? You think extending unemployment benefits and using Stimulus money to create jobs and cut taxes is far left? You mean Wall Street Reform isn’t popular with most Americans? Hell, Health Care Reform, according to polls, isn’t far left enough! These Republicans and those in their Tea Party base can pat themselves on the back Wednesday morning, but they didn’t win because they have better ideas than the President or the Democrats. They won because they did nothing and fooled already right-leaning ignoramuses into thinking the country is in decline because of the ‘Far Left Agenda.’
Hello, Mike Huckabee, if you’re listening... Evolution is fact, Climate Change is real, there is no such thing as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or god, and the reason the country is in decline is because two years of minimal progress thanks to Republicans dragging their heels is not enough time to undo eight years of Republican policy throwing this country into a rapid downward spiral! We are still spinning, only now we’re just slowing down and slightly tilting upward. But if that’s not good enough for you and your friends, please come up with better ideas to fix this country than the one you have about going back to doing everything the same before you broke it instead of criticizing the way we’ve been working to fix it.
Yes, things aren't great around here. Yes, things might even get worse. But are the Republicans going to do anything to make things better? What have they done in the last thirty years to make life better for the average American? Who started the wars? Who let corporations send jobs overseas? Who gave tax cuts to the wealthy and proved Trickle-Down economics a failure then who gave tax cuts to the wealthy even though Trickle-Down economics was already proved a failure? Who bailed out Wall Street? Who opposed putting regulations on Wall Street? Who opposed putting regulations on anything? I could go on and on!
I get it, the economy is bad and people are frustrated. And sure, it’s easy to believe that if the party in power isn’t making the change quick enough, maybe the other party put in power will. But really? The Republican party that started this mess to begin with is going to get us out of it? Why would anyone believe that? Was it the nonsense they spew on Fox News that made people think that? Was it the political ads paid for by corporate money? Do you really think, given their history, the Republicans are going to do anything to help the average American? The Republican party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the corporations. They vote for what’s best for Big Business, Big Oil, and Big Insurance. For chrissakes, our new Speaker of the House, John Boehner, handed out bribes from Big Tobacco to Congressman on the floor of the House of Representatives!
Face it folks, the corporations mean to own this country and the Republicans are just working to make it easier for them. If you don’t think that is true, you’re not paying attention. Look around. Think about it. Where do you work? Where do you buy your groceries? Got any credit cards? Got any loans? What do you watch on TV? What do you read? Who do you think pays for those political ads you see? Who do you think funds political campaigns? Who do you think convinces politicians to vote certain ways? Yes, maybe YOU do. Maybe. Maybe you wrote a check for $10, $20, maybe even $100, but that's chump-change. Yeah, maybe you can't trust any politician, but why elect politicians you already know can't be trusted? If you thought, 'hell, maybe in the last two years Republicans learned their lesson,' you'd be a fool. If you thought, 'maybe if I vote for the Republicans this time that will mean Democrats will work harder in Congress,' you'd be a fool. If you voted for a Republican because you thought he or she was ‘just like you,’ then you'd either be crazy and irresponsible too, or you'd be a damn fool. Because what we do know about Republicans is that they can't be trusted to do what's in our best interest. We do know that the Republicans plan is to sell our country to the Corporations. We do know that it is in their interest to keep the middle class down in order to exploit us for the benefit of the Corporations. Why do you think they talk about wanting to do away with labor unions, privatize social security, outlaw unemployment benefits, outlaw the minimum wage? Why do they align themselves with the Corporate funded U.S. Chamber of Commerce and their efforts to outsource jobs, end financial regulation, lobby to allow Big Business to avoid paying tax, pollute the environment, and discriminate against and exploit workers. Do you think it's fair that Corporations can avoid paying taxes in America? How do you feel about the Republicans apologizing to BP over the Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico? What do you think of Dead Peasant Insurance? Recently the big fuss was over whether the U.S. Chamber of Commerce took FOREIGN Corporate money to pay for political campaign ads or donations to candidates but the real story should have been about how the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was allowing ANY Corporation to buy Democracy.
You see, the Republicans have a plan. They’ll tell you that they have a plan to get people back to work and get this economy headed in the right direction, but don’t be fooled. They and their Corporate pals have figured out how to make this economy work for them. All they needed to do was continue making decisions to sink the economy, put people out of work and in debt, fool everyone into blaming the immigrants for taking American jobs, the unemployed for being lazy, and Democrats and labor unions for regulations, so that the working class will fight against their own best interests and keep the Republicans in power. Then when working class Americans are desperate enough to take any work the corporations will shift jobs back to America, from places like China and Mexico whose workers are demanding higher pay, and be able to pay less than minimum wage, extend the 40 hour work week, reduce vacation time, and not provide benefits like health care or retirement funds all thanks to Republicans in Congress. All the while, Republicans will have worked to remove the safety nets of unemployment coverage, health coverage, disability coverage, and social security ensuring that the American worker of tomorrow will be treated to the same life as the undocumented migrant worker of today. As Rush Limbaugh said, “Some people are just born to be slaves.”
I understand, America. You‘re too busy to stay informed. Too busy ignoring the news because you find the economy and the wars a bummer. Too busy worrying about buying shit you don’t need and driving cars that get lousy gas mileage. Too busy eating fast food and watching nugget porn on your iphones. You have short attention spans and even shorter patience. You think President Obama should have fixed everything in 20 months. Fine, whatever. But seriously? Are you that stupid to let Republicans take back the reins of this crippled horse we call America and steer it back down the gulch we suffered two years to climb out of? Really? You mean these last two years were all for nothing? Well, thanks a lot, you dumbshit assholes. Thanks for electing the people who bent us over for eight long years under Bush/ Cheney! Thanks for electing the people who played party politics and stood in the way of progress rather than work with our President to bring the change we wanted! Thanks for electing crazy people with extremist views just because you think the real politicians in Washington aren't doing enough. Thanks for not paying attention to the news or researching the candidates you either voted for or couldn’t be bothered to vote for! Thanks for opening up two more years of partisan gridlock in Congress. You thought nothing got better these last two years? Just wait until the Republicans spend all their time trying to impeach our President over some bullshit like he's not a natural born citizen. Seriously? What were you thinking, America? I can only hope that two more years of Republicans selling this country out will finally wake this nation up and by 2012 we will return President Obama and the Democratic party to Washington to work on behalf of the American people! I just hope that we can survive those two years.
For us sane, sober Americans, election results may be a tad depressing, but they aren't much of a surprise. The bad news - the House is controlled by the Republicans with orange jackass, John Boehner, as speaker. The good news - most of the Tea Party candidates lost. Also, it shouldn’t come as a shock that states like Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Alaska, Alabama, Georgia, etc. went Red. Sure there may have been an upset or two; that’s how these midterm elections usually go, but it could have been worse. So, sing it with me - "Always look on the bright side of life!"
As far as the morning after explanations: Whack-jobs like Mike Huckabee want to make statements like, “Obama overreached with his far left agenda and America is letting him know it”, but Mike Huckabee and others think anything close to center is too far left for them. Seriously, Huckster? Far left agenda? You think extending unemployment benefits and using Stimulus money to create jobs and cut taxes is far left? You mean Wall Street Reform isn’t popular with most Americans? Hell, Health Care Reform, according to polls, isn’t far left enough! These Republicans and those in their Tea Party base can pat themselves on the back Wednesday morning, but they didn’t win because they have better ideas than the President or the Democrats. They won because they did nothing and fooled already right-leaning ignoramuses into thinking the country is in decline because of the ‘Far Left Agenda.’
Hello, Mike Huckabee, if you’re listening... Evolution is fact, Climate Change is real, there is no such thing as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or god, and the reason the country is in decline is because two years of minimal progress thanks to Republicans dragging their heels is not enough time to undo eight years of Republican policy throwing this country into a rapid downward spiral! We are still spinning, only now we’re just slowing down and slightly tilting upward. But if that’s not good enough for you and your friends, please come up with better ideas to fix this country than the one you have about going back to doing everything the same before you broke it instead of criticizing the way we’ve been working to fix it.
Yes, things aren't great around here. Yes, things might even get worse. But are the Republicans going to do anything to make things better? What have they done in the last thirty years to make life better for the average American? Who started the wars? Who let corporations send jobs overseas? Who gave tax cuts to the wealthy and proved Trickle-Down economics a failure then who gave tax cuts to the wealthy even though Trickle-Down economics was already proved a failure? Who bailed out Wall Street? Who opposed putting regulations on Wall Street? Who opposed putting regulations on anything? I could go on and on!
I get it, the economy is bad and people are frustrated. And sure, it’s easy to believe that if the party in power isn’t making the change quick enough, maybe the other party put in power will. But really? The Republican party that started this mess to begin with is going to get us out of it? Why would anyone believe that? Was it the nonsense they spew on Fox News that made people think that? Was it the political ads paid for by corporate money? Do you really think, given their history, the Republicans are going to do anything to help the average American? The Republican party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the corporations. They vote for what’s best for Big Business, Big Oil, and Big Insurance. For chrissakes, our new Speaker of the House, John Boehner, handed out bribes from Big Tobacco to Congressman on the floor of the House of Representatives!
Face it folks, the corporations mean to own this country and the Republicans are just working to make it easier for them. If you don’t think that is true, you’re not paying attention. Look around. Think about it. Where do you work? Where do you buy your groceries? Got any credit cards? Got any loans? What do you watch on TV? What do you read? Who do you think pays for those political ads you see? Who do you think funds political campaigns? Who do you think convinces politicians to vote certain ways? Yes, maybe YOU do. Maybe. Maybe you wrote a check for $10, $20, maybe even $100, but that's chump-change. Yeah, maybe you can't trust any politician, but why elect politicians you already know can't be trusted? If you thought, 'hell, maybe in the last two years Republicans learned their lesson,' you'd be a fool. If you thought, 'maybe if I vote for the Republicans this time that will mean Democrats will work harder in Congress,' you'd be a fool. If you voted for a Republican because you thought he or she was ‘just like you,’ then you'd either be crazy and irresponsible too, or you'd be a damn fool. Because what we do know about Republicans is that they can't be trusted to do what's in our best interest. We do know that the Republicans plan is to sell our country to the Corporations. We do know that it is in their interest to keep the middle class down in order to exploit us for the benefit of the Corporations. Why do you think they talk about wanting to do away with labor unions, privatize social security, outlaw unemployment benefits, outlaw the minimum wage? Why do they align themselves with the Corporate funded U.S. Chamber of Commerce and their efforts to outsource jobs, end financial regulation, lobby to allow Big Business to avoid paying tax, pollute the environment, and discriminate against and exploit workers. Do you think it's fair that Corporations can avoid paying taxes in America? How do you feel about the Republicans apologizing to BP over the Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico? What do you think of Dead Peasant Insurance? Recently the big fuss was over whether the U.S. Chamber of Commerce took FOREIGN Corporate money to pay for political campaign ads or donations to candidates but the real story should have been about how the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was allowing ANY Corporation to buy Democracy.
You see, the Republicans have a plan. They’ll tell you that they have a plan to get people back to work and get this economy headed in the right direction, but don’t be fooled. They and their Corporate pals have figured out how to make this economy work for them. All they needed to do was continue making decisions to sink the economy, put people out of work and in debt, fool everyone into blaming the immigrants for taking American jobs, the unemployed for being lazy, and Democrats and labor unions for regulations, so that the working class will fight against their own best interests and keep the Republicans in power. Then when working class Americans are desperate enough to take any work the corporations will shift jobs back to America, from places like China and Mexico whose workers are demanding higher pay, and be able to pay less than minimum wage, extend the 40 hour work week, reduce vacation time, and not provide benefits like health care or retirement funds all thanks to Republicans in Congress. All the while, Republicans will have worked to remove the safety nets of unemployment coverage, health coverage, disability coverage, and social security ensuring that the American worker of tomorrow will be treated to the same life as the undocumented migrant worker of today. As Rush Limbaugh said, “Some people are just born to be slaves.”
I understand, America. You‘re too busy to stay informed. Too busy ignoring the news because you find the economy and the wars a bummer. Too busy worrying about buying shit you don’t need and driving cars that get lousy gas mileage. Too busy eating fast food and watching nugget porn on your iphones. You have short attention spans and even shorter patience. You think President Obama should have fixed everything in 20 months. Fine, whatever. But seriously? Are you that stupid to let Republicans take back the reins of this crippled horse we call America and steer it back down the gulch we suffered two years to climb out of? Really? You mean these last two years were all for nothing? Well, thanks a lot, you dumbshit assholes. Thanks for electing the people who bent us over for eight long years under Bush/ Cheney! Thanks for electing the people who played party politics and stood in the way of progress rather than work with our President to bring the change we wanted! Thanks for electing crazy people with extremist views just because you think the real politicians in Washington aren't doing enough. Thanks for not paying attention to the news or researching the candidates you either voted for or couldn’t be bothered to vote for! Thanks for opening up two more years of partisan gridlock in Congress. You thought nothing got better these last two years? Just wait until the Republicans spend all their time trying to impeach our President over some bullshit like he's not a natural born citizen. Seriously? What were you thinking, America? I can only hope that two more years of Republicans selling this country out will finally wake this nation up and by 2012 we will return President Obama and the Democratic party to Washington to work on behalf of the American people! I just hope that we can survive those two years.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Dangerous Territory
The Republicans are not even in power yet, but this is what we have to look forward to - Intimidation - Threats of Government halts and takeover - Being detained by militia members for being a journalist and asking questions - Getting wrestled to the ground and having your head stomped on for protesting - A whole media outlet spewing racism, homophobic, and Islamophobic hate-speech. A political party that declares it's number one goal is to defeat the President rather than work with him to make America a better place for all Americans during this time of war and economic hardship. This is not the America I want. Why would anyone want that kind of America?
Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader, has embraced the sentiment of Rush Limbaugh's hope that President Obama fails. In an interview with Major Garrett (former Fox News White House Correspondent who thought it was a better career move to be in print/ web journalism than work for Fox News), McConnell says: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Really? Nothing more important to work on, Mitch? How's those wars coming, pal? The economy in good shape, buddy?
Two years of this nonsense from the Republicans! And on top of that, lying to the American people - fooling them into thinking that it's President Obama and the Democrats in Congress that aren't fixing this country. Republicans have voted largely in lock step against the President and against the best interests of all of us by living up to their moniker as the Party-of-No!
But what gets people upset? Juan Williams gets fired from NPR? Who gives a damn? Juan Williams should have known better. All people in the media should know better, especially in the last few months. Helen Thomas found out you can't talk bad about Jews when she got fired for saying they "should get the hell out of Palestine." Rick Sanchez got fired from CNN because he had a bug up his ass from Jon Stewart making fun of him and went on the radio and said: "I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they -- the people in this country who are Jewish -- are an oppressed minority? Yeah." So why shouldn't people in the media be held liable if they make inappropriate comments about other religious groups? This is what Juan Williams, who worked for NPR and Fox News at the time, said on Bill O'Reilly's show:
"I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."
Is this a free speech issue? No! Juan Williams can say what he wants to say but, like everyone else, he represents the company he works for. He made the mistake of thinking that since Fox News was paying him to be on O'Reilly's show, what he had to say didn't matter to NPR. Maybe he does feel the way he feels, but he shouldn't have said it, especially if it was just pandering to Bill O'Reilly and his audience. The real question I have is why Juan Williams feels that way? Perhaps he's been watching Bill O'Reilly's Anti-Muslim network and listening to other Islamophobic hate-speech that's been popular lately. Why would he get nervous?
It's not even an issue that what Juan Williams said was politically incorrect, because it's just incorrect. What does, "identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims" even mean? Their "garb?" Is it their style of dress? Are they carrying the Koran? Because the 9/11 terrorists, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, and the Times Square bomber didn't look all that different from anyone else. In fact, they made sure that they blended right in. So, I would think that if Juan Williams did see a person who did 'look Muslim,' my guess is that he should safe, and likely that Muslim would fear Juan Williams just as much. What Juan Williams said was wrong, but lucky for him, it turns out Fox News doesn't feel the same way about Islamophobia that NPR does.
NPR takes a stand and fires Williams and then Fox News hands him a $2 million contract to represent Fox News. Of course, Williams and others take the opportunity to slam NPR. Williams telling the Baltimore Sun: "...there's an emotional disconnect, because the way it feels to me is like I just got fired and I'm not even sure what I did wrong." Well sure, how could you feel like you've done something wrong if, on top of being an ignorant bigot, you are rewarded $2 million? Williams goes on in the interview to proclaim, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Fox News is not racist: "Just consider the idea that Fox allows me the opportunity to sit in for Bill O’Reilly on their No. 1 show. That’s the franchise. That’s the moneymaker. If that show falls in the toilet, it’s bad for the whole lineup. And yet Fox allows a black guy with a Hispanic name to sit in the big chair and host the show." You mean like how it says a lot about the Republican party that they choose Sarah Palin to run for Vice President in 2008! Really? Fox News is not racist?
Does Juan Williams watch Fox News? Or is there that same disconnect where he doesn't think that what they do is wrong? Like his pal, Bill O'Reilly? Bill O'Reilly didn't just say something once to upset the ladies at The View. When he said, "Muslims killed us on 9/11," this was his typical Islamophobic hate-speech that he spews nightly on The Factor. Nearly every night, O'Reilly discusses what he calls 'The Muslim Problem,' where is fond of throwing out zingers like, "the most unattractive women in the world are probably in the Muslim countries," "we can't kill all the Muslims, so we want to win as many hearts and minds of good, moderate Muslims as we can," and his claim that the media "doesn’t target Muslims because they might get their house blown up.”
It's not just Bill O'Reilly on Fox News, either. The next day Brian Kilmeade on the program Fox and Friends defended O'Reilly's statement on The View by saying, "They were outraged that someone was saying that there was a reason there was a certain group of people that attacked us on 9/11. It wasn’t just one person, it was one religion. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims." Yeah, just like all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. Except NOT all Muslims are terrorists and NOT all terrorists are Muslim while not all racists work for Fox News, but...
Those at Fox News should be held accountable for its part in this wave of Islamophobia hitting the nation. They should be held accountable for filling the heads of troubled Americans, sick and afraid due to economic and social conditions, with this disgusting bigotry. They should be admonished for the network's deplorable, incendiary rhetoric and cowardly behavior by practicing hate-speech and then claiming innocence when those who in the audience turn that hate-speech into hate-crimes. Besides pushing an Anti-Muslim agenda, Bill O'Reilly has blood on his hands over the murder of Dr. George Tiller, a reproductive services provider who performed abortions, whom O'Reilly had spent years enflaming his Anti-Choice audience by referring to Dr. Tiller as "Tiller the Baby Killer." While Bill O'Reilly didn't actually pull the trigger, he certainly did all he could to help ensure it. In July, Byron Williams, an unemployed ex-felon and big fan of Glenn Beck, was influenced to arm himself and drive to the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, two groups Beck constantly attacks on his radio and television program. After his car was pulled over by police for swerving, it was then that the 45-year-old burst from his car, bullet-proof vest on and guns a blazing, beginning an action movie-like shootout with California police. Later in an interview, Byron Williams told Media Matters that he was influenced to violence by the rantings of Glenn Beck and Mike Savage and that his intention was to "start a revolution."
Juan Williams may not understand it yet, but others at Fox News know exactly what they are doing. Former Fox News employee, Major Garrett, now free to express his view without fear of recrimination said on MSNBC's Morning Joe with Joe Scarborough:
"For a certain amount of marketing points of view, Fox actually wants to keep that polarization. They can say look, we're different. We're dramatically different, you can see how we're different. And if you like that difference you better come over here and you better stay here. That is an embedded part of the marketing that surrounds what happens in the news division at Fox. It's been incredibly successful."
Tell the audience what they want to hear and they'll tune in. If need be, turn up the heat or raise the stakes. If things get out of hand, if someone should be incensed towards violence, then claim ignorance.
Fox News knows what its intent is and it's not reporting the news or truth or facts; it's about making money by pandering to an audience of Right-wingers who fall somewhere in the categories of racist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, Homophobic, xenophobic, Anti-women's rights, anti-gun control, war mongering, oil thirsting, Evolution denying, climate change denying, militia joining, Christian extremists who fear and hate the blacks, the gays, the Muslims, the Jews, the Mexicans, the Commies, the Socialists, the IRS, the Doctors who perform abortions, the women who undergo abortions, the police, the government, the President, and, oh yeah, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. Do they realize that they are puppets to the corporations? No. Would they care if they did? Maybe. But I'm sure they would find a way to blame Obama.
I'm worried about the elections. I'm worried that the Republicans and the Tea Party crazies will take over government. I'm worried that the little progress we've made these last two years, thanks to Republican obstruction, will be halted and reversed. I'm worried that the Tea Party and Birther movements will waste valuable time in their bullshit attempts at Impeaching our President and demoralizing the American people. I even worried what will happen if the Republicans don't take over Congress. These are people that don't want to compromise. These are people that can't be reasoned with. With everyday that passes, everything I hear from the right makes me think less about them. The things they believe and the things they unabashedly say reminds me of that Department of Homeland Security Report on Rightwing Extremism and how when it came out in April 2009 the Right picked up the slogan "Proud To Be A Right-Wing Extremist" and put it on buttons, t-shirts, and bumper stickers. That DHS Report makes these important points:
"...rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment."
"The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the 1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers."
"The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement."
"Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers."
"Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."
"Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent."
"Fear of Communist regimes and related conspiracy theories characterizing the U.S. Government’s role as either complicit in a foreign invasion or acquiescing as part of a “One World Government” plan inspired extremist members of the militia movement to target government and military facilities in past years."
So, when I hear Republicans and Tea Party Republicans talking about "Second Amendment Remedies" and keeping violence "on the table," I worry. When I hear the potential Speaker of the House, John Boehner, will be campaigning on the behalf of Rich Iott, Ohio Congressional candidate and Nazi reenactor, I worry. When people talk about overthrowing the government and our President, I worry. The elections this week will decide the future of this country and I worry. We are wading into dangerous territory here.
Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader, has embraced the sentiment of Rush Limbaugh's hope that President Obama fails. In an interview with Major Garrett (former Fox News White House Correspondent who thought it was a better career move to be in print/ web journalism than work for Fox News), McConnell says: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Really? Nothing more important to work on, Mitch? How's those wars coming, pal? The economy in good shape, buddy?
Two years of this nonsense from the Republicans! And on top of that, lying to the American people - fooling them into thinking that it's President Obama and the Democrats in Congress that aren't fixing this country. Republicans have voted largely in lock step against the President and against the best interests of all of us by living up to their moniker as the Party-of-No!
But what gets people upset? Juan Williams gets fired from NPR? Who gives a damn? Juan Williams should have known better. All people in the media should know better, especially in the last few months. Helen Thomas found out you can't talk bad about Jews when she got fired for saying they "should get the hell out of Palestine." Rick Sanchez got fired from CNN because he had a bug up his ass from Jon Stewart making fun of him and went on the radio and said: "I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they -- the people in this country who are Jewish -- are an oppressed minority? Yeah." So why shouldn't people in the media be held liable if they make inappropriate comments about other religious groups? This is what Juan Williams, who worked for NPR and Fox News at the time, said on Bill O'Reilly's show:
"I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."
Is this a free speech issue? No! Juan Williams can say what he wants to say but, like everyone else, he represents the company he works for. He made the mistake of thinking that since Fox News was paying him to be on O'Reilly's show, what he had to say didn't matter to NPR. Maybe he does feel the way he feels, but he shouldn't have said it, especially if it was just pandering to Bill O'Reilly and his audience. The real question I have is why Juan Williams feels that way? Perhaps he's been watching Bill O'Reilly's Anti-Muslim network and listening to other Islamophobic hate-speech that's been popular lately. Why would he get nervous?
It's not even an issue that what Juan Williams said was politically incorrect, because it's just incorrect. What does, "identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims" even mean? Their "garb?" Is it their style of dress? Are they carrying the Koran? Because the 9/11 terrorists, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, and the Times Square bomber didn't look all that different from anyone else. In fact, they made sure that they blended right in. So, I would think that if Juan Williams did see a person who did 'look Muslim,' my guess is that he should safe, and likely that Muslim would fear Juan Williams just as much. What Juan Williams said was wrong, but lucky for him, it turns out Fox News doesn't feel the same way about Islamophobia that NPR does.
NPR takes a stand and fires Williams and then Fox News hands him a $2 million contract to represent Fox News. Of course, Williams and others take the opportunity to slam NPR. Williams telling the Baltimore Sun: "...there's an emotional disconnect, because the way it feels to me is like I just got fired and I'm not even sure what I did wrong." Well sure, how could you feel like you've done something wrong if, on top of being an ignorant bigot, you are rewarded $2 million? Williams goes on in the interview to proclaim, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Fox News is not racist: "Just consider the idea that Fox allows me the opportunity to sit in for Bill O’Reilly on their No. 1 show. That’s the franchise. That’s the moneymaker. If that show falls in the toilet, it’s bad for the whole lineup. And yet Fox allows a black guy with a Hispanic name to sit in the big chair and host the show." You mean like how it says a lot about the Republican party that they choose Sarah Palin to run for Vice President in 2008! Really? Fox News is not racist?
Does Juan Williams watch Fox News? Or is there that same disconnect where he doesn't think that what they do is wrong? Like his pal, Bill O'Reilly? Bill O'Reilly didn't just say something once to upset the ladies at The View. When he said, "Muslims killed us on 9/11," this was his typical Islamophobic hate-speech that he spews nightly on The Factor. Nearly every night, O'Reilly discusses what he calls 'The Muslim Problem,' where is fond of throwing out zingers like, "the most unattractive women in the world are probably in the Muslim countries," "we can't kill all the Muslims, so we want to win as many hearts and minds of good, moderate Muslims as we can," and his claim that the media "doesn’t target Muslims because they might get their house blown up.”
It's not just Bill O'Reilly on Fox News, either. The next day Brian Kilmeade on the program Fox and Friends defended O'Reilly's statement on The View by saying, "They were outraged that someone was saying that there was a reason there was a certain group of people that attacked us on 9/11. It wasn’t just one person, it was one religion. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims." Yeah, just like all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. Except NOT all Muslims are terrorists and NOT all terrorists are Muslim while not all racists work for Fox News, but...
Those at Fox News should be held accountable for its part in this wave of Islamophobia hitting the nation. They should be held accountable for filling the heads of troubled Americans, sick and afraid due to economic and social conditions, with this disgusting bigotry. They should be admonished for the network's deplorable, incendiary rhetoric and cowardly behavior by practicing hate-speech and then claiming innocence when those who in the audience turn that hate-speech into hate-crimes. Besides pushing an Anti-Muslim agenda, Bill O'Reilly has blood on his hands over the murder of Dr. George Tiller, a reproductive services provider who performed abortions, whom O'Reilly had spent years enflaming his Anti-Choice audience by referring to Dr. Tiller as "Tiller the Baby Killer." While Bill O'Reilly didn't actually pull the trigger, he certainly did all he could to help ensure it. In July, Byron Williams, an unemployed ex-felon and big fan of Glenn Beck, was influenced to arm himself and drive to the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, two groups Beck constantly attacks on his radio and television program. After his car was pulled over by police for swerving, it was then that the 45-year-old burst from his car, bullet-proof vest on and guns a blazing, beginning an action movie-like shootout with California police. Later in an interview, Byron Williams told Media Matters that he was influenced to violence by the rantings of Glenn Beck and Mike Savage and that his intention was to "start a revolution."
Juan Williams may not understand it yet, but others at Fox News know exactly what they are doing. Former Fox News employee, Major Garrett, now free to express his view without fear of recrimination said on MSNBC's Morning Joe with Joe Scarborough:
"For a certain amount of marketing points of view, Fox actually wants to keep that polarization. They can say look, we're different. We're dramatically different, you can see how we're different. And if you like that difference you better come over here and you better stay here. That is an embedded part of the marketing that surrounds what happens in the news division at Fox. It's been incredibly successful."
Tell the audience what they want to hear and they'll tune in. If need be, turn up the heat or raise the stakes. If things get out of hand, if someone should be incensed towards violence, then claim ignorance.
Fox News knows what its intent is and it's not reporting the news or truth or facts; it's about making money by pandering to an audience of Right-wingers who fall somewhere in the categories of racist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, Homophobic, xenophobic, Anti-women's rights, anti-gun control, war mongering, oil thirsting, Evolution denying, climate change denying, militia joining, Christian extremists who fear and hate the blacks, the gays, the Muslims, the Jews, the Mexicans, the Commies, the Socialists, the IRS, the Doctors who perform abortions, the women who undergo abortions, the police, the government, the President, and, oh yeah, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. Do they realize that they are puppets to the corporations? No. Would they care if they did? Maybe. But I'm sure they would find a way to blame Obama.
I'm worried about the elections. I'm worried that the Republicans and the Tea Party crazies will take over government. I'm worried that the little progress we've made these last two years, thanks to Republican obstruction, will be halted and reversed. I'm worried that the Tea Party and Birther movements will waste valuable time in their bullshit attempts at Impeaching our President and demoralizing the American people. I even worried what will happen if the Republicans don't take over Congress. These are people that don't want to compromise. These are people that can't be reasoned with. With everyday that passes, everything I hear from the right makes me think less about them. The things they believe and the things they unabashedly say reminds me of that Department of Homeland Security Report on Rightwing Extremism and how when it came out in April 2009 the Right picked up the slogan "Proud To Be A Right-Wing Extremist" and put it on buttons, t-shirts, and bumper stickers. That DHS Report makes these important points:
"...rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment."
"The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the 1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers."
"The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement."
"Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers."
"Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."
"Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent."
"Fear of Communist regimes and related conspiracy theories characterizing the U.S. Government’s role as either complicit in a foreign invasion or acquiescing as part of a “One World Government” plan inspired extremist members of the militia movement to target government and military facilities in past years."
So, when I hear Republicans and Tea Party Republicans talking about "Second Amendment Remedies" and keeping violence "on the table," I worry. When I hear the potential Speaker of the House, John Boehner, will be campaigning on the behalf of Rich Iott, Ohio Congressional candidate and Nazi reenactor, I worry. When people talk about overthrowing the government and our President, I worry. The elections this week will decide the future of this country and I worry. We are wading into dangerous territory here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)