Your blogger

My photo
When Roger West first launched the progressive political blog "News From The Other Side" in May 2010, he could hardly have predicted the impact that his venture would have on the media and political debate. As the New Media emerged as a counterbalance to established media sources, Roger wrote his copious blogs about national politics, the tea party movement, mid-term elections, and the failings of the radical right to the vanguard of the New Media movement. Roger West's efforts as a leading blogger have tremendous reach. NFTOS has led the effort to bring accountability to mainstream media sources such as FOX NEWS,CNN and Andy Breitbart's "Big Journalism. Roger's breadth of experience, engaging style, and cultivation of loyal readership - over 92 million visitors - give him unique insight into the past, present, and future of the New Media and political rhetoric that exists in our society today. What we are against: Radical Right Wing Agendas Incompetent Establishment Public Coruption Corporate Malfeasence We are for: Global and Econmoic Security Social and Economic Justice Media Accountability Healthy Communities

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

The Herman Cain Train

Cain’s latest allegations sound like ‘Leave it to … let’s not say Beaver’ says Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert.

Colbert begging 999 to stay in race

Stephen Colbert has long been a staunch supporter of Herman Cain, and he’s not giving up on the former pizza CEO and one-time Republican presidential frontrunner over a paltry 13-year affair. But Colbert is worried we could lose him, after Cain said Tuesday he is “reassessing” his candidacy.

“Herman, don’t you leave this election-lovers pizza half baked,” Colbert said Tuesday. “There’s no reason for you to leave. A 13-year affair just proves you can carry on a stable relationship. Two, counting your marriage!”
And this affair, unlike the earlier allegations, was apparently consensual. “I’d say things are looking up,” Colbert said. “Compared to all that reaching-for-the-lady-parts-like-a-dachshund-going-after-a-ball-under-the-couch, these new allegations sound like leave it to … let’s not say beaver.”

Plus, Colbert added, if the allegations prove true, Cain’s only one extra-marital affair puts him well behind Newt Gingrich.




Teapublicans and affairs seem to go hand in hand of late. Its apparent [with polls having Mr. 999 (Cain) handing the baton to Eye of Newt whom is now holding the top rung as leading teapublican ] radical teas accept infidelity and groping with open arms and they treat it like its a leading quality for the seat in the oval office.

The once Former House Speaker Eye of Newt Gingrich was having extramarital affairs even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair. I have always said that teapublicans are the most hypocritical beings on the planet, and its never been more evident than with Mr. 999 and the eye of Newt. Extramarital affairs have dogged Gingrich for years as a result of two messy divorces, but even this is not enough to cause consternation amongst teapublicans.

When the Atlanta businesswoman came forward in an interview broadcast Monday to say she had a 13-year affair with Herman Cain, the latest in a string of women to make allegations of improper conduct by the presidential candidate, teapublicans seemed unfazed.

To prove her assertions, the woman, Ginger White, told Fox News in Atlanta that she had records of 61 phone calls or text messages to or from a number starting with the area code 678 that she said was Mr. Cain’s number.

She said that she met Mr. Cain in the late 1990s in Louisville, Ky., and that they often stayed together at the Ritz-Carlton in Buckhead, Ga. She added that the physical affair ended eight months ago.

Mr. Cain denied the woman’s assertions during an interview on CNN Monday afternoon, in which he first publicized word of Ms. White’s charges.

                 “I want to give you a heads up and everyone a heads up,” he told Wolf Blitzer.

                  “Here we go again,” he said of the allegations. “I didn’t do anything wrong.”

On its Web site Monday afternoon, Fox 5 Atlanta identified the woman as Ms. White.

“It was pretty simple,” Ms. White told the station. “It wasn’t complicated. I was aware that he was married. And I was also aware I was involved in a very inappropriate situation, relationship.”
Fox said that it texted the number Ms. White gave them and that Herman Cain returned the call. Fox said Mr. Cain said he “knew Ginger White” and and that she had his number because he was “trying to help her financially.”

In the CNN interview, Mr. Cain said the latest allegations would not cause him to leave the presidential race. He said the woman was an acquaintance.

Ms. White is the fifth woman to come forward with allegations of improper conduct by Mr. Cain.

When will teapublicans have moral fiber? Its like the owl in the Tootsie Roll Pops advertisement trying to get to the center of that tootsie roll tootsie pop......"The world may never know"!


NFTOS

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Hey Jamie, "Your Only Pledge Should Be To Uphold The Constitution Of The United States"

Constituents rebuke GOP congresswoman for her allegiance to ‘No Tax’ pledge instead of the Constitution.

Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA)


Last week, Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA) continued the trend of Republicans avoiding angry constituents by holding an invitation-only “community coffee.” But even the small number of constituents at the exclusive event did not let Herrera Beutler off the hook, asking her tough questions about her allegiance to a “no tax” pledge:
U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler said Tuesday she’s happy with the smaller settings of her invitation-only “community coffees” and isn’t planning to hold another large-scale town hall. About 60 people attended her latest gathering at Judy’s Restaurant in Longview on Tuesday morning, a fraction of the attendance at earlier town halls in her Southwest Washington district.

At Tuesday’s meeting, the more intimate setting didn’t cause people to shy away from criticizing the congresswoman. Kathy Thompson, a Longview real-estate broker, blasted Herrera Beutler for signing conservative activist Grover Norquist’s pledge not to support any tax increase of any kind.

“I think this is totally un-American. I think your only pledge should be to uphold the Constitution of the United States,” Thompson said.

Avoiding constituents is nothing new for Herrera Beutler — in October she even asked a local paper to keep her town hall meeting a secret. Her office does not send advance notice of meetings to local media and she doesn’t post alerts on her website. She admits that she decided to limit attendance after she was confronted at a May town hall by attendees who asked “hostile questions” about the House GOP budget, which would have effectively eliminated Medicare.

Other GOP representatives have also faced a backlash from constituents for their uncompromising, ideologically rigid commitment to Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist’s “no tax” pledge. (Norquist considers any tax increase, for any reason, a violation of the pledge.) One audience member told Rep. Chris Gibson (R-NY), “We are your constituents, not Grover Norquist.”

More and more Republican congressmen, though, are disavowing the pledge after witnessing the ill effects of promising never to raise taxes under any circumstance. GOP Rep. Frank Wolf (VA) said the pledge had the effect of “paralyzing Congress” and making it impossible to even discuss ways to reform the tax code. Onetime devotee Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) also denounced the pledge, explaining, “We have to have the flexibility to do the right thing for American people.”

While this is a start, we know that republicans often only use the Constitution when it suits their radical ideology, and when it doesn't they then want to amend it or even do away with it.


NFTOS

Monday, November 28, 2011

Hey (R-KS) Governor Sam Brownback.....YOU SUCK!

High School student fights back against Gov. Sam Brownback’s intimidation and will not write apology.

Last Monday, Kansas high school student Emma Sullivan attended a speech by radical tea bag Gov. Sam Brownback (R-KS), during which she published a tweet critical of the governor. In response, Brownback’s office reported Sullivan’s critical tweet to her high school’s administration, and the high school principal ordered her to write a letter of apology — despite the fact that this punishment is unconstitutional because Sullivan’s tweet is protected by the First Amendment.

Last night, Sullivan sent out another tweet — announcing that she will not obey her principal’s unconstitutional command to apologize to the thin-skinned governor:


Among other things, this incident highlights the incompetence of Brownback’s communications team. At the time of her first tweet, Sullivan had only a few dozen followers. Had the governor’s office simply ignored the tweet, it’s doubtful that more than a few people would have read it. Instead, they decided to intimidate the dissenting teenager by reporting her — and the incident blew up into a major national news story. As of this writing, Sullivan has more than 4,000 Twitter followers.


Team Brownback justifies its heavy-handed response by claiming that Sullivan’s original tweet — which said that Brownback “sucked” and ended with the hashtag #heblowsalot” — wasn’t respectful.” Perhaps it wasn’t, but the First Amendment cares very little whether a persons’ speech is respectful or not. One of the Supreme Court’s seminal First Amendment cases held that the words “Fuck the Draft” are protected speech. And, while a public school student’s First Amendment rights are somewhat reduced, schools typically cannot discipline students for speaking out unless their speech is likely to disrupt the school’s learning environment.

Now that Sullivan has chosen to assert her First Amendment rights, the ball is in the school’s court. If they are smart, they will recognize that their attempt to punish Sullivan unambiguously violates the Constitution and save themselves from expensive potential litigation that they are exceedingly unlikely to win.


NFTOS

Friday, November 25, 2011

Who Says Americans Go Hungry?

Last year, 17.2 million households in the United States were food insecure, the highest level on record, as the Great Recession continued to wreak havoc on families across the country. Of those 17.2 million households, 3.9 million included children. With Thanksgiving just ending lets take a look at hunger in America, as millions of Americans struggle to get enough to eat in the wake of the economic crisis:

17.2 million: The number of households that were food insecure in 2010, the highest number on record. They make up 14.5 percent of households, or approximately one in seven.

48.8 million: People who lived in food insecure households last year.

3.9 million: The number of households with children that were food insecure last year. In 1 percent of households with children, “one or more of the children experienced the most severe food-insecure condition measured by USDA, very low food security, in which meals were irregular and food intake was below levels considered adequate by caregivers.”

6.4 million: Households that experienced very low food security last year, meaning “normal eating patterns of one or more household members were disrupted and food intake was reduced at times during the year because they had insufficient money or other resources for food.”

55: The percentage of food-insecure households that participated in one or more of the three largest Federal food and nutrition assistance programs (SNAP, WIC, School lunch program).

19.4: The percentage of food insecure households in Mississippi, which had the highest rate in the nation last year.

3.6 percent: The amount by which food prices increased last year.

30 percent: The amount by which food insecurity grew during the Great Recession.

44: The percentage increase in households using food pantries between 2007 and 2009.

20 million: The number of children who benefit from free and reduced lunch per day.

10.5 million: The number of eligible children who don’t receive their free and reduced lunch benefits.

$167.5 billion: The amount that the U.S. lost in 2010 due to hunger (lost educational attainment + avoidable illness + charitable giving to fight hunger). This doesn’t take into account the $94 billion cost of SNAP and other food programs.

8: The number of states (FL, TX, CA, IL, NY, OH, PA, GA) where the annual cost of hunger exceeds $6 billion.

Last year, “nearly half of the households seeking emergency food assistance reported having to choose between paying for utilities or heating fuel and food. Nearly 40 percent said they had to choose between paying for rent or a mortgage and food.” This Thanksgiving, as you sit down to enjoy a meal with family and friends, please spare a thought for those who, due to the country’s continuing economic woes, may not have enough to eat.

Its turly said that in the richest county in the world we have this type of hunger!

Below are two apropos videos





NFTOS

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Faux News Viewers Again Top Stupid List



Study after study, year after year, polls prove that Faux News viewers are a little less than coherent on topics or subject matter regarding national politics and worldly affairs .

Quick, were Egyptian protesters successful in their bid to overthrow longtime president Hosni Mubarak earlier this year?

According to a new poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University, if you watch Faux News you are significantly less likely to know the correct answer to that question than if you mostly avoid news shows and newspapers all together.

"Faux News viewers are less informed than people who don't watch any news, according to a new poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University."

The poll surveyed New Jersey residents about the uprisings in Egypt and the Middle East, and where they get their news sources. The study, which controlled for demographic factors like education and partisanship, found that "people who watch Faux News are 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians overthrew their government" and "6-points less likely to know that Syrians have not yet overthrown their government" compared to those who watch no news.

Overall, 53% of all respondents knew that Egyptians successfully overthrew Hosni Mubarak and 48% knew that Syrians have yet to overthrow their government.

Dan Cassino, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson, explained in a statement:
 "Because of the controls for partisanship, we know these results are not just driven by Republicans or other groups being more likely to watch Fox News. Rather, the results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all."
This isn't the first study that has found that Faux News viewers are more misinformed in comparison to others. Last year, a study from the University of Maryland found that Faux News viewers were more likely to believe false information about politics.

This speaks volumes about the quality and style of Faux News, but also about the makeup and intellectual prowess of their audience. This is truly amazing, imagine what abysmal journalism this must be, for people who don’t watch any news to know more than Faux viewers! News can inform people, if done properly, but Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch et al would rather interject bullshit and fear into its' ["the most watched news source"] viewers.

Roger Ailes and Faux News deliberately manipulate it's news coverage and its effective, just review the plethora of polls suggesting that its viewers are a benighted group.

Credit to huffpo and old friend BP for this story.

Post Script: To my neighbor R.S. and to the facebook chum whom was hurt and won his purple heart from playing basketball on the gym court......quit watching Faux News for your an ignorant lot


NFTOS

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Mittens And Coterie Chuck Mail To Avoid Scrutiny

Romney admits he destroyed government records to keep them from political opponents.

Last week, a Boston Globe investigation uncovered that former Gov. Mitt Romney’s administration destroyed emails, purchased hard drives, and otherwise obliterated all digital records of his time as governor of Massachusetts. This happened as Romney was leaving the state to campaign for president (the first time), and observers immediately speculated that the systematic destruction was politically motivated to hide embarrassing data.

Romney and his campaign have so far denied this, with the candidate saying this weekend in New Hampshire that his staff took the highly unusual step of purchasing their work hard drives because they might contain “confidential and private” information. Meanwhile, he’s made calls for greater White House transparency a part of his campaign message.

But in a fairly stunning admission during an interview with the editorial board of the Nashua Telegraph in New Hampshire, Romney suggested that his administration deleted emails because they didn’t want “opposition research teams” to have access to them:
ROMNEY: Well, I think in government we should follow the law. And there has never been an administration that has provided to the opposition research team, or to the public, electronic communications. So ours would have been the first.



While Romney’s claim that no previous administration had kept emails may be true, that’s hardly a strong precedent given that emailing was not commonplace for very many years before Romney took office.

Meanwhile, Romney clearly broke precedent with the hard drive buybacks, as staffers for previous administration called the purchases “unheard of.” Terry Dolan, who worked in six previous administrations in the state, told the Globe, “That had not happened prior to the end of the Romney administration.” “I don’t remember anybody buying their hard drives. I don’t remember anybody buying anything,’’ said Stephen Crosby, who worked for Romney’s two predecessors.


NFTOS

Monday, November 21, 2011

Rick Perry's Plan

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) has staked his presidential hopes on a radical revamping of Washington’s political structure, reshaping the tax code, making the legislature part-time, enacting term limits on the Supreme Court, and closing multiple government agencies.

Perry took his radical new vision for America to a new level the other night at the Iowa FAMILY Leader presidential forum. Going against the Constitution, centuries of American history, and the wishes of our nation’s founders, Perry claimed that the United States military should not be “micromanaged” by civilians and needed military commanders to be “truly in charge”
PERRY: There is a time and a place for us to intervene, and intervene militarily. But when we intervene militarily, we best make the decision on how we are going to win and how we are going to win convincingly and quickly, send those young men and women with the equipment to win. Don’t let some congressman sitting in an air-conditioned office in Washington DC deciding what the rules of engagement are. … And for us to micromanage them, in a civilian way, without their commanders truly in charge, is absolutely irresponsible and as commander-in-chief of this country I will not let it happen.

By design, the U.S. military has always been under civilian control. While the president acts as the military’s civilian commander-in-chief, Congress has the Constitutionally-mandated authority to apportion military funding and approve any declaration of war. The military’s nuclear weapons, meanwhile, are owned and controlled by the civilian Department of Energy (which Perry, incidentally, wants to abolish).

The civilian structure of the military Perry has no use for wasn’t an accident — it is the norm in liberal democracies and what America’s Founding Fathers wanted. As Samuel Adams wrote in 1768, “Even when there is a necessity of the military power, within a land, a wise and prudent people will always have a watchful and jealous eye over it.” The founders feared giving too much power to military could lead to an oppressive federal government, the specter of which Perry has built his entire political ideology against.

Not only is Perry’s Constitutional history lacking, but his knowledge of current events is too. American military commanders — whom Perry asserts aren’t currently in charge — back the timetable to begin removing troops from Afghanistan at the end of the year.


NFTOS




 

Friday, November 18, 2011

Does She Really Have A Clue?

The fact that Michelle Bachmann ever imagined she had any chance of getting the Republican nomination not only shows how FUBAR the party has become. Seriously, there is no part of her that is in any way connected with reality. Rather, she lives in a parallel reality that has many of the same names and faces as our own, but where everything's distorted and weird, and more than a little creepy. Kind of like Mardi Gras, but without the fun.





Michele Bachmann prides herself for pressing Republicans to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but during an appearance at Webster City, Iowa Wednesday night, the Minnesota congresswoman proved that she’s also leading the charge in developing outrageous new attacks against the legislation. At the town hall, Bachmann complained that undocumented immigrants are exempt from paying for the law, claimed that a seven-foot doctor told her the IRS had to approve medical procedures, and reiterated her long-standing view that doctors and hospitals would provide free care to the uninsured if they were shielded from malpractice claims:


“Under Obamacare illegal aliens don’t have to pay for Obamacare. Only American citizens pay for Obamacare. Illegal aliens have the possibility of getting the care, but they have no requirement to pay for the care. Only the citizens do.”

“One man stood up, he was over 7-feet tall. He was a physician in the community. And he said, ‘I had a little lady in my office and because of Obamacare, I had to call the IRS and I had to get a number to put on a form before I could see her.’”

 “When I was a little girl…There were people who could not pay [for health care]. I mean they just did not have any money at all. And so the doctor would just write it off. It’s very different today. Now, doctors don’t feel like they can do that…they worry about liability.”




 It’s hard to make sense of any of Bachmann’s claims. Republicans successfully fought to keep undocumented immigrants from receiving tax credits through the exchanges and the ACA does nothing to change the existing Reagan-era law that requires hospitals to provide health care to everyone in need of emergency services. Undocumented immigrants also paid $11.2 billion in taxes in 2010, including $8.4 billion in sales taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes, and $1.2 billion in personal income taxes.


The seven-foot doctor’s claims are similarly dubious, since the IRS does not begin enforcing the individual requirement to purchase health insurance until 2014 — and even then, the penalty is processed through personal income tax returns and would not require a medical provider to call the agency. Finally, Bachmann’s oft-repeated solution to reducing the number of uninsured — shield doctors from lawsuits and they’ll provide free health care to anyone who needs it — is a poor idea, to put it charitably, and hasn’t actually increased access to providers in states with existing “liability shield” regulations.

Seriously readers, could Bachmann truly be so ignorant of the healthcare law that she really believes there's some element of this story that makes sense? What number could the IRS possibly be giving him for a Medicare recipient? Exactly what part of Obamacare supposedly made this happen? And why would this doctor be the one on hold for two hours, instead of his receptionist? Could she have dreamed up the whole thing, and if she did, would her staff let us know? Perhaps someone should ask Ed Rollins about it, as he always seems eager to dish dirt on her.

Most of all, the 64 thousand dollar questions is - we need to know precisely which drugs Bachmann was on when this tall doctor supposedly told her this, as well as which drugs she was on when she told the story. Because whatever it was, people need to be warned about it. They could just put a picture of Bachmann on the label and everyone would know what that meant. I wonder if she was suffering from another migraine during either episode.

With Bachmann only holding 5% in the latest polls, isn't it about time she just went back to doing......whatever it is she does?


NFTOS

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Eye of Newt Takes Lobbyist To New Level...Then Lies About It

Not just Freddie Mac, Newt Gingrich’s long history of influence peddling for his corporate clients.


Caught flatfooted in the CNBC debate when a moderator asked about his past work for Freddie Mac, Newt Gingrich has since twisted and turned, making up every excuse under the sun to obscure his post-politician career as a K Street operator. Despite the revelation that he was paid at least $1.6 million by the troubled mortgage giant to do far more than give “history” lessons, the former Speaker has stubbornly stuck to his guns. On Laura Ingraham radio show yesterday, Gingrich, again attempting to spin his work for Freddie Mac, claimed that his firm literally does “no lobbying”:

To help clear the record, here

To help clear the record, here is compiled short history of Gingrich’s influence peddling: (Collection brought to you by thinkprogress).
Helping To Secure Health IT Earmarks For GE, Microsoft, IBM: Gingrich headed a for-profit health care consulting firm that engages in activities identical in nature to lobbying. As Business Week reported, firms like GE have hired Gingrich to figure out “on how to grab some of the $19.6 billion in federal stimulus money” on healthcare IT grants. A follow-up investigation found that Gingrich had been paid to bring health IT lobbyists together with lawmakers like Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) and Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN).
The Ethanol Lobby’s “Consulting” Contract With Gingrich: Growth Industry, the trade association for the ethanol energy lobby, provided a $312,500 contract to Gingrich’s consulting firm in 2009, according to a report by iWatch News. An association publication conceded that Gingrich was paid for “strategy and communication issues.” The retainer allowed the lobby group, then pressing for further government subsidies, to use Gingrich to “speak positively on ethanol related topics to media.”
Gingrich Lobbied To Deregulate Insurers, While Accepting Hundreds Of Thousands From Health Insurance Corporations: Through his for-profit healthcare consulting firm, Gingrich accepted up to $200,000 in annual fees from insurers like WellPoint and UnitedHealth. Gingrich not only pushed anti-health reform conspiracies like the infamous “death panel” smear, but he also crafted model legislation that formed the basis of GOP deregulatory proposals for health insurers. In March 2009, Gingrich met with Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) and other members of the GOP Doctors Caucus to help write conservative health reform alternative legislation. “Gingrich provided us with great insight as we work to craft health care solutions for the 21st Century,” proclaimed Gingrey after the meeting. Gingrich also wrote healthcare legislation introduced by Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA), and “consulted” with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) on health reform legislation that would deregulate the insurance industry. During this blitz of what many would consider lobbying-like activity, the BlueCross & BlueShield Association and AHIP, the umbrella lobbying group for the health insurance industry, paid Gingrich fees as well. 
“Sharing Resources” With The Oil Industry’s Top Lobbyists: In February of last year a public relations executive close to the oil industry who said that Gingrich’s political attack group, called ASWF, had been “sharing resources, coordinating efforts” with the American Petroleum Institute (API), the main oil lobby association. In an interview later Gingrich confirmed that he had been working closely with API.
Gingrich Sells His “Strategic Advice” To Lobbying Giants Like The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce: James Oliphant reported on the latest controversy over Gingrich’s lobbying for Freddie Mac, noting that Gingrich’s firm has also been paid by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the mega-corporate lobbying coalition, for “strategic advice.”

Gingrich may defend his unregistered lobbying by claiming that he does not meet the legal threshold in terms of legislator contact. However, news reports have painted a picture of Gingrich as constantly in communication with lawmakers and other public officials. According to the New York Times, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) has been known to discuss strategy on a “regular basis” with Gingrich. The Hill reported that Gingrich attended whip meetings with the GOP caucus to “educate” rank and file Republican lawmakers on the health reform debate. And as a separate piece from the Times noted, Gingrich fires off what have become known as “Newtgrams” — personal e-mails and messages with tactical advice — frequently to Republican legislators in both the House and Senate.

Gingrich was once asked why he never registered as a lobbyist, despite his clear history of pressing Congress on behalf of his clients. Gingrich defended his actions by stating that his lobbying is not technically lobbying because it “benefits the country at large.”

You know when the republicans have the eye of newt leading the polls, that their bar isn't set too high..really president Newt? With three marriages, ( leaves one wife while under going cancer treatment and cheats on another) ethics is the furthest thing from the radical teas mindset, as it appears any warm body will do. But what do we expect when "Mr. I Don't Know" (Rick Perry) and The Groper (Herman Cain) are the bar setters?



NFTOS

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Figures Lie And Liars Figure

Last night, former Bush official Karl Rove appeared at Johns Hopkins University to speak as a part of the annual Milton S. Eisenhower Symposium. Rove soon discovered that he wasn’t going to deliver his right-wing rhetoric unopposed, as a cry of “Mic Check!” rang out among the audience.

“Karl Rove is the architect of Occupy Iraq, the architect of Occupy Afghanistan!” yelled the demonstrators. Occupy Baltimore had infiltrated the crowd and began chanting against Rove. “Who gave you the right to occupy America?” asked Rove to the protesters, apparently unaware of the Bill of Rights. As they repeated their slogan, “We are the 99 percent!” Rove petulantly responded, “No you’re not!” He snidely added, “You wanna keep jumping up and yelling that you’re the 99 percent? How presumptuous and arrogant can you think are!” Watch Occupy Baltimore confront Rove:




Rove Background: On several occasions, Rove has found himself at the center of a publicized scandal, though it should be noted that this has happened far fewer times than one would expect from a person with such dubious morals contempt for even a semblance of ethical behavior at the expense of political capital.

 Rove was, more than once, caught having policy meetings with the heads of corporations he owned stock in. These allegations are questionable, however, as they are generally insignificant considering Rove's overall body of work. This would be similar to prosecuting Slobodan Milosevic for writing bad checks.

 Additionally, Rove had his hand in every major scandal over the 7 years he worked in the White House.

 Having lost out the opportunity to be the primary source for the Valerie Plame leak, Rove had to settle for later confirming classified information. Rove was held in contempt of Congress for failing to testify over the firing of U.S. attorneys. In both cases, Rove was involved enough to commit a crime, but his involvement was convoluted enough for no one to care. This should come as no surprise considering those circumstances defined eight years of policy in the executive branch.

 While in the White House, Rove avoided using the official government e-mail servers to send correspondence. This is the first time a skill set invented by porn-aficionados with desk jobs was used to avoid federal indictment.

 Karl's speech is an example of how figures lie and liars figure...listening to the beginning of his speech - presumptuous? how presumptuous is it to presume his ill-gotten wealth entitles his crowd, the 1%, to control the 99%? How arrogant to believe that he should be paid by a place of "learning" to LIE? Hey, Rove, read the Bill of Rights and the Constitution and you'll find the answers to all your questions.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Not Ready For Prime Time Players

Months before total confusion on Libya, Herman Cain was totally sure Obama was wrong.

Former pizza executive Herman Cain has struggled with foreign policy throughout his campaign to be commander in chief, but never more so than an in an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel today in which he muddled through a flailing, nonsensical answer on Libya for five excruciating minutes. Ultimately, Cain lands on being generally supportive of the intervention, but says he perhaps would have a bit more cautious at the outset.

But this seems to contradict with his longstanding strident opposition to the Libyan expedition. “I’ve said many times before that US intervention in Lybia is inappropriate and wrong. The US does not belong in this war,” he wrote in a Twitter debate in July. That same month, he appeared on John Stossel’s show on Fox Business, where he clearly stated his opposition.

It’s worth noting that Cain’s foreign policy slogan is “peace through strength and clarity.”





Unlike Rick Perry’s infamous “faux Pas ” moment, Cain doesn’t appear to have a momentary brain lapse, but seems to be genuinely befuddled by the substance of the question. Last month, Cain said he had studied up on foreign policy and “challenge anybody who says I wouldn’t know how to address foreign policy.”


While becoming the next commander in chief is looking increasingly unlikely for Cain, he has a backup plan. This weekend, he said he would like to be secretary of defense so he could “kick the you-know-what out of everyone in the world.”


NFTOS

Monday, November 14, 2011

"Toxic Marxist"



Yesterday morning on Fox News Sunday, conservative panelists did their best to smear and discredit the 99 Percent Movement. Pundit Bill Kristol called the protests “un-American” and “fundamentally undemocratic,” despite the fact that recent polls show that they are supported by a majority of Americans. Kristol even complained that the world “occupy” was itself Marxist.

Fox anchor Brit Hume called Democrats’ support of the movement “toxic” to centrist voters who decide elections:

HUME: To most middle-of-the-road voters, those who decide elections, Occupy Wall Street is toxic…She [Nancy Pelosi] said it’s focused, and I guess it’s brought some attention to the issue of income inequality, which will be a big Democratic talking point in this election cycle, but I think they need to get away from these Occupy Wall Street protesters as fast as they can. 


Hume’s claim flies in the face of most polling about public support for the protests. For instance, according to the CBS/New York Times poll taken just one month after the start of the first encampment in New York, 43 percent of Americans said they agree with the movement. Another poll for the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found a similar level of support. Most importantly, in both polls, support for the movement was stronger among independent voters.

In short, the goals of Occupy Wall Street have already captured the support of the voters in the middle of the political spectrum, and its themes of income inequality, unemployment, and corporate corruption have already begun to change the discussion.


NFTOS

Friday, November 11, 2011

Lin Wood Threatens Future Cain Accusers

Wood states "Think Twice" before coming forward or they’ll be smeared too.

A story in yesterdays New York Times offers a disturbing look at the smear tactics and threats the Cain campaign is using to intimidate the four women accusing the candidate of sexual harassment, and any women that might come forward in the future:

L. Lin Wood, the lawyer hired by the Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain to fend off sexual harassment accusations, has warned that any other women who might be considering coming forward with similar allegations “should think twice.”

 On Wednesday morning, less than 24 hours after Karen Kraushaar identified herself as one of two women who had received monetary settlements relating to harassment allegations against Mr. Cain while working for the National Restaurant Association in the late 1990s, Ms. Kraushaar faced questions about a workplace complaint she filed at a subsequent job… Hours later, Rush Limbaugh seized on that report to argue that Ms. Kraushaar has “a pattern of whining.”
She and the others confronted the challenges of taking on a presidential candidate: intensive scrutiny of their backgrounds and motives, encouraged and amplified in this case by conservative news outlets and commentators whose support for Mr. Cain as he battles the allegations has helped him weather the crisis so far.
Cain and his defenders aren’t bothering to conceal their intention to silence would-be accusers with bullying. The campaign has hired investigators to dig up dirt on the women. Many respected media outlets are becoming willing accomplices in the diversion of questioning the alleged victims rather than investigating Cain’s conduct.


The insulting assumption behind the AP’s decision to investigate and report on Kraushaar’s past in the first place is, of course, that her credibility is diminished because she had problems with another employer. Besides the fact that the other complaint had nothing to do with sexual harassment, it’s also absurd to think that the same woman couldn’t experience hostile situations in two workplaces.


According to one report, one in ten women in the workplace will at some point be “promised promotion or better treatment if they [are] ‘sexually cooperative‘” with a co-worker or supervisor. Kraushaar didn’t want to come forward but was publicly outed against her will. Instead of becoming a passive voice in the media maelstorm, she chose to accept the situation and tell her story.


Sharon Bialeck, the first woman to go public with her accusation, also had every detail of her past and financial history picked over — never mind that she has shown no intention of suing Cain for money. During a press conference this week, Cain said he couldn’t remember meeting Bialeck, yet called her “troubled,” out for money, and part of a Democrat machine” out to destroy him. Bialeck and Kraushaar are both registered Republicans. Fully aware of the attacks they would face, they say they spoke out because they felt compelled to inform Americans about a leading presidential candidate’s actions and character.

Conservatives’ knee-jerk reaction has been to blame the women before learning anything about them. Republicans have suggested that what Cain allegedly did wasn’t so bad, that sexual harassment doesn’t even exist or is only, in Rush Limbaugh’s words, “a political tool of the left to get rid of people, or to score money gains.” A New York Post columnist called Bialek a “gold digger” who “flirted like a tart” with Cain.

 Sadly, the smear campaign Cain’s accusers are facing is exactly the reason many women don’t report incidents of rape or harassment. They fear they won’t be believed or taken seriously, and may well suffer retribution for filing complaints. That message is only reinforced for women watching the persecution of Cain’s accusers, who may conclude that reporting assaults is not worth the risk of public shaming.

Rape and sexual assault are two of the most under-reported crimes, with fully 60 percent of cases not reported to police. Women know that if they press charges or go public, they may be called “sluts” and have their sexual pasts used against them — which is why many states have rape shield laws to protect victims from having irrelevant facts jeopardize their ability to get a fair hearing.

The Cain campaign’s deplorable tactics are already having their desired affect: Kraushaar told friends that all the scrutiny might keep the other women from speaking out with her.



NFTOS

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Modus Operandi Of Herman Cain

Herman Cain’s ‘Princess Nancy’ remark is not an isolated incident!

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, who has spent the last two weeks denying multiple sexual harassment and assault charges, was roundly criticized in last night’s debate for referring to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as “Princess Nancy.” Cain was contrite afterward, saying, “That was a statement I probably should not have made.” However, on his radio show prior to running for president, Cain regularly referred to Pelosi by the same chauvinistic moniker. Listen to one example of Cain deriding “Princess Nancy” from Aug. 11, 2010 (relevant portion at 2:05):  


 
There is a pattern with Cain that is a bit unsettling and NFTOS Editor in Chief Roger West is quoted as saying “Cain needs to know that you can’t ride two horses with one ass”.

Herman’s gender problems are serious business, and the bumbling radical republican frontrunner barely had a moment to enjoy a celebratory gust of second-hand smoke after squeezing ahead of the pack at the Iowa caucuses when Politico detonated a giant stink-bomb of an exclusive.

Herman Cain’s Sexual Harassment "9-9-9" plan now consists of sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "ninenineninenineninenine" until this ugly mess goes away.

Unfortunately for the “Godfather” this only goes away when he himself slithers away like those before him.

NFTOS likens Cain to the plethora of other freaks in political sexual shame: David Wu, Anthony Weiner, Mark Souder, Eric Massa, John Ensign, John Edwards, Larry Craig, David Vitter, Mark Foley, Jack Ryan, Newt Gingrich, Robert Packwood, Gary Hart.

We say to you Herman Cain, your fifteen minutes of fame are up!


NFTOS

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Ohioans Send Stern Message To Radical Republican Tea Baggers.

Ohioans kick the “Koch habit”!

Ohioans overwhelmingly voted to repeal their Governors union busting bill. Not even millionaire tea baggers “the Koch brothers” could buy the slam dunk choke and puke politics of the beloved Governor's bill.  



Ohio Democrats, who got absolutely creamed in the 2010 elections, have now won a major victory over Republican Gov. John Kasich — massively winning a referendum to repeal Kasich’s anti-public employee union law.

With 100% of precincts reporting — which includes a significant chunk of the total ballots, due to early-votes being counted quickly — the bill known as SB 5 is losing by a margin of 61%-39%.  
Pre-election polling showed the No campaign winning by over 20 points — and it seemed possible at time of writing that the final margin might even surpass this.




Talking Points Memo has documented that SB 5 had become a political poster child for Democrats pushing against Republicans, following the 2010 GOP wave, with the Dems and labor unions mobilizing while at the same time Kasich’s popularity tanked in the polls.

This follows a near-miss by the Dems and labor in Wisconsin, where they attempted to recall their way a majority in the state Senate after Gov. Scott Walker passed similar legislation. However, they were also hampered by the fact that the only recall-eligible districts were ones where the incumbent had won their terms in 2008, even during that year’s Democratic wave. They ultimately picked up two seats, just short of the magic number of three seats.





However, the Dems there are still not finished — and the upcoming effort to recall Walker, and to take another try at state Senate recalls in newly recall-eligible seats, could be the new battle going into 2012.

In Ohio, the law was passed earlier this year by Kasich and the Republican legislature. However, it never actually went into effect, as the citizen-initiated referendum process — spearheaded by the Dems and the unions — put the law on hold pending the referendum.  

Triggering a repeal referendum required organizers to collect signatures equal to just six percent of the total votes in the last gubernatorial election, with additional requirements that they be sufficiently spread out around the state, with at least three percent of the gubernatorial vote across at least half the counties in the state. That meant the threshold was 231,150 signatures — but organizers fired their opening political salvo by collecting four times as many, thus creating a greater base for the actual campaign.

Ohio is one of many states where Republicans took over state government in 2010, and proceeded to pass comprehensive legislation to strip away collective bargaining rights for public employee unions. But unlike the high-profile cases of Wisconsin and Michigan, Democrats were able to use the state referendum process to put the law directly on the ballot — thus setting up a top-tier political battle in this major swing state, and a possible resurgence by the state Democratic Party.

This vote certainly puts radical republicans on notice that this type of choke and puke politics will not be acceptable.  
The vote has national implications, emboldening Democrats for Obama’s re-election bid next year after defeats in 2010 and discouraging Republicans in other states from trying to curb public-sector unions, said Paul Beck, a political-science professor at Ohio State University in Columbus.


NFTOS

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Hey George Bush

Poll: 62 Percent Say Iraq War Wasn’t Worth Fighting - Seventy-eight percent of Americans support President Obama’s order to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of the year, according to a Washington-Post ABC News poll. While the decision to withdraw from Iraq receives broad public support, attitudes toward the war itself remain negative. Sixty-two percent of all respondents and 66 percent of independents said the war was not worth its costs. Only 33 percent said the war was worth fighting:


Thanks GW for a unwanted war 4400 soldiers dead and 32 thousand wounded!



NFTOS

Monday, November 7, 2011

Sexual Harassment “It’s Like Ordering Popeye’s Chicken”!




Mike Huckabee once a governor, now a Faux News talking head.

Another example of being promoted to your highest level of incompetence.  
 
 
NFTOS

Friday, November 4, 2011

Koch Brothers And The Dream Summit

Romney Campaign Memo: The Koch Brothers are the ‘financial engine of the tea Pprty’

Today, billionaire David Koch and presidential candidate Mitt Romney are set to speak at the a Tea Party conference financed by the same Koch brother’s fortune. The Defending the Dream Summit, a conference funded by Koch and sponsored by his Americans for Prosperity group, is a yearly event where Republican politicians come to praise the Koch brothers and their political network. For instance, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), as he was seeking the Republican nomination, paid tribute to the Koch’s political network at the same event in 2007.
 
Meanwhile, the Washington Examiner, which happens to be owned by an allied billionaire named Phil Anschutz, obtained a Romney campaign memo that details its outreach effort to the Koch brothers and the Tea Party. The memo acknowledges what has been reported for two years now — that the Kochs are the “financial engine of the Tea Party,” as the memo put it. Moreover, the memo expands on Romney’s courtship of the billionaire petrochemical brothers, including a meeting in January at an elite social club in Manhattan and an August meeting that had to be canceled because of Hurricane Irene:

Americans for Prosperity is led by billionaire Republican donor David Koch, whose endorsement Romney seeks. An Oct. 4 internal Romney campaign memo obtained by The Washington Examiner describes Koch as the “financial engine of the Tea Party” even though Koch “denies being directly involved.” Koch endorsed Romney for president in 2008 and his well-funded group is credited with electing dozens of Republicans to Congress in 2010 and creating a network of Tea Party loyalists who are critical to Romney’s chances of winning the nomination, political strategists say.

The memo says Romney was scheduled to meet with David Koch on August 28 at the billionaire’s home in Southampton, N.Y. — where Koch held a major event for Romney in 2010 — but Hurricane Irene foiled their plans. The two last met in January for lunch in Manhattan at the Links Club, an elite social club for avid golfers.
Indeed, not only did Koch endorse Romney in 2008, but one of Romney’s first major campaign fundraisers for the 2012 cycle was hosted at Koch’s mansion in the Hamptons last year.

NFTOS

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Coulter, Cain, and Cut Throat Politics

In the fallout of the Herman Cain sexual harassment story, Ann (“the man”) Coulter has quickly become one of the most prominent voices defending the Republican presidential candidate, calling racism against him and other black conservatives for their politics. She went a step further on Hannity the other night, claiming that “our [conservative] blacks are so much better than their blacks,” and the following night she proved to Joy Behar she didn’t just say that because she was among ideological friends.

Coulter is a right-winged teabagger who often has nothing to offer but hatred, accusations and unfounded blathering.





Ann is certainly not ever going to receive accolades from NFTOS, as we have often pointed out Coulter’s poor judgment of character and intellect when it comes to politics. There is probably not another woman on terra firms more despised than Coulter, which to her is an honor. Coulter is often ridiculed for exhibiting a man like Adam’s apple and on more occasion’s than I can count has been called on her anatomy and sexual orientation.

Coulter is an American conservative pundit, a syndicated columnist, a best-selling author (to RINO’s only, Republican In Name Only), a frequent television (Faux News) and radio guest (Glenn Beck), a self-described “polemicist,” and a self-promoting hatemonger. Best known for purveying hate, Coulter revels in the mass loathing she herself inspires a delight so aberrational as to invite speculation that she may in fact be an alien life form. That, actually, would explain a lot.  

Politico stunned the republican presidential campaign Sunday night with a hit piece on Herman Cain alleging with unnamed sources that two women accused the Republican candidate of "inappropriate behavior" decades ago. As we heard on the Ed Shultz show last night a third woman is accusing the “Godfather” of inappropriate actions.

Cain’s campaign team is blaming Rick Perry’s for the outing; Herman Cain lashed out at rival Rick Perry on Wednesday, accusing the Texas governor’s campaign of orchestrating the original report about allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior.

Cain said his opponents were "trying to destroy me" and got testy with reporters demanding answers even as reports surfaced of a third woman claiming she was harassed.

Cain chief of staff Mark Block issued a scathing indictment of rival conservative Perry's camp which he said had spread false allegations:

"It's an outrage," Block told Faux News. "The Perry campaign needs to apologize to Herman Cain and his family and America for this despicable action."


Cain and Perry are fighting it out to be the main conservative challenger to former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican nomination to take on President Barack Obama next year.

Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan said the charge that the Texas governor's team was behind the sexual harassment claims that surfaced over the weekend were both reckless and false:

"Contrary to the Cain campaign's false accusations, there is not one shred of evidence that any member of the Perry campaign had anything to do with the recent stories regarding Herman Cain -- because it isn't true," Sullivan said in a statement.


Cain, the former chief executive officer of Godfather's Pizza, struggled to get control of the escalating crisis just as he was leading in many polls of Republican voters.

This in-fighting reminds me of two rednecks at a family picnic fighting over a cousin for marriage. If teabaggers are so willing to cut the very throat of their own kind, what does this mean for you and I when these less than desirable characters get into office and our livelihoods are on the line.  
 
 
NFTOS

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Bait And Switch

Glenn Beck-Approved Goldline charged with 19 criminal counts of fraud and theft.



Goldline International, the precious metal retailer that has capitalized on conservatives’ anxiety about the economy by forging synergistic relationships with right wing TV and radio hosts, is facing a new series of legal challenges after authorities filed criminal charges against the company and its executives yesterday. Several major conservative talkers — including two former GOP presidential candidates — have endorsed and recommended Goldine, which critics have long contended is little more than a scam.

After more than a year of investigating, the city attorney in Santa Monica, California, where the company is based, has filed 19 criminal charges of fraud and theft against the company, in addition to charges against top executives and salesmen, ABC News reports:


The complaint alleges that Goldline “runs a bait and switch operation in which customers, seeking to invest in gold bullion, are switched to highly overpriced coins by using false and misleading claims,” according to a statement released by the consumer affairs division of the Santa Monica City Attorney’s office.

The company has been charged in the court filing with misdemeanors that include theft by false pretenses, false advertising, and conspiracy, the City Attorney’s office said. In addition to the charges against the company, the complaint accuses former CEO Mark Albarian, executives Robert Fazio and Luis Beeli, and salespeople Charles Boratgis and Stephanie Howard of defrauding customers. Current CEO Scott Carter is accused of making false or misleading statements.


While former Faux News conspiracy-theorist Glenn Beck is most closely associated with Goldline, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Mark Levin, former GOP presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson, and several Fox News hosts, among others, have all endorsed the company.

Indeed, conservative talk radio is central to the company’s success, as Goldline employs a business model based not on mere advertising, but full integration with the content of conservative talk show hosts’ messages. The company’s website prominently features these endorsers, suggesting the talkers’ backing gives Goldline “credibility.” The company has said it will vigorously contest the charges.

Each of the charges carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail and maximum fines of between $1,000 and $10,000 per offense.

NFTOS

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Virginia's Eric Cantor Shows Who's Hands Are In His Pockets

Cantor rakes in Wall Street donations while calling occupy protesters A ‘Mob’.


The Condesending Eric Cantor

When the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations first gained some national prominence, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) derided the protesters as a “mob,” saying, “Believe it or not, some in this town have actually condoned the pitting of Americans against Americans.”

Cantor eventually softened his rhetoric, and even scheduled a talk about income inequality (that he proceeded to cancel when he realized that the public would be allowed to attend). But Cantor has plenty of reasons to bash the protests because, as Roll Call noted today, Cantor’s top contributor this year is Wall Street:

Cantor’s personal political action committee has collected close to $2 million so far this year, placing it well ahead of any other leadership PAC in the House or Senate. In all of his fundraising efforts, top executives at banks, hedge funds and securities and investment firms play a starring role. Securities and investment industry donors have given close to $350,000 to both Cantor’s campaign and his leadership PAC this year, making them his top source of donations, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

But Cantor has raised millions more than that for a lucrative operation known as the Cantor Victory Fund 2012…Ten major donors, many of them top executives with finance industry firms, have given $50,000 or more this year to the Cantor Victory Fund, which has collected $2.4 million, according to the most recent public disclosures.
 
Cantor has pushed several policies near and dear to Wall Street’s heart, including protecting tax loopholes for hedge fund managers, while managing to come up with no ideas for addressing income inequality. In fact, he believes we should just depend on the wealthy to bring down inequality through the goodness of their hearts. And so far, Wall Street has certainly shown its appreciation for Cantor’s positions.



NFTOS