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
Your blogger
- News From The Other Side
- 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, 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 Donald J. Trump Corporate Malfeasence We are for: Global and Econmoic Security Social and Economic Justice Media Accountability THE RESISTANCE
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
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:
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
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
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
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
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:
NFTOS
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.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.
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.
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:
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:
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
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:
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
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’.
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 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
 |
| 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
Monday, October 31, 2011
Virginia’s Cuccinelli Proves Even He Is Off The Reservation
Cuccinelli: Senate GOP ‘Jobs’ Bill ‘Tramples the States and Violates the Constitution’.
In the never ending saga from camp tea bag - if it doesn't align with radical ideology than its unconstitutional!
Earlier this month, Senate Republicans cobbled together many of their longstanding objectives, and called it a “jobs” bill to try to draw attention away from President Obama’s popular American Jobs Act. Yet this plan backfired on the Senate GOP leadership when Tea Party lawmakers began lining up to denounce a key provision of their makeshift “jobs” bill as unconstitutional. This provision — a proposal to impose damage caps on medical malpractice suits in both state and federal court — has now attracted the ire of yet another Tea Party heartthrob, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli:
In reality readers, the constitutional case against federal tort reform is very weak. Congress enjoys broad authority to regulation national economic markets, such as the market for health care, and that includes the power to regulate those markets badly. If people don’t like the laws their elected officials put in place, our democratic Constitution empowers them to vote those officials out of office — it does not empower the law’s opponents to simply declare anything they want unconstitutional.
Nevertheless, Cuccinelli’s strident opposition to this law — and that of others such as tenther Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) — should stand as a warning to Republicans who raced to embrace a crackpot theory of the Constitution the minute President Obama signed a health care law they disapproved of. Federally imposed tort reform has been a centerpiece of GOP health care policy for many years, and now this longstanding Republican goal many be unachievable because too many Republican lawmakers were conned into embracing Cuccinelli and Lee’s tenther vision of the Constitution.
We here at NFTOS say that those that live by crackpot distortions of our Constitution, die by crackpot distortions of our Constitution.
NFTOS
In the never ending saga from camp tea bag - if it doesn't align with radical ideology than its unconstitutional!
Earlier this month, Senate Republicans cobbled together many of their longstanding objectives, and called it a “jobs” bill to try to draw attention away from President Obama’s popular American Jobs Act. Yet this plan backfired on the Senate GOP leadership when Tea Party lawmakers began lining up to denounce a key provision of their makeshift “jobs” bill as unconstitutional. This provision — a proposal to impose damage caps on medical malpractice suits in both state and federal court — has now attracted the ire of yet another Tea Party heartthrob, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli:
With Senate Bill 197 — legislation that would have the federal government dictate how state judges are to try medical malpractice cases and cap what state courts may award — several Republican senators have reminded us that federal impositions on states that run contrary to the U.S. Constitution and to the spirit of federalism have never been the sole prerogative of just Democrats. . . . This legislation expands federal power, tramples the states and violates the Constitution. And if it were ever signed into law — by a Republican or Democratic president — I would file suit against it just as fast as I filed suit when the federal health-care bill was signed into law in March 2010 (15 minutes later).
In reality readers, the constitutional case against federal tort reform is very weak. Congress enjoys broad authority to regulation national economic markets, such as the market for health care, and that includes the power to regulate those markets badly. If people don’t like the laws their elected officials put in place, our democratic Constitution empowers them to vote those officials out of office — it does not empower the law’s opponents to simply declare anything they want unconstitutional.
Nevertheless, Cuccinelli’s strident opposition to this law — and that of others such as tenther Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) — should stand as a warning to Republicans who raced to embrace a crackpot theory of the Constitution the minute President Obama signed a health care law they disapproved of. Federally imposed tort reform has been a centerpiece of GOP health care policy for many years, and now this longstanding Republican goal many be unachievable because too many Republican lawmakers were conned into embracing Cuccinelli and Lee’s tenther vision of the Constitution.
We here at NFTOS say that those that live by crackpot distortions of our Constitution, die by crackpot distortions of our Constitution.
NFTOS
Friday, October 28, 2011
Glenn Beck…….Still An Idiot
Two weeks ago, Sgt. Shamar Thomas, an Iraq war vet who spent 14 months in Iraq, was captured in a viral YouTube video chastising the New York Police Department for using excessive force against demonstrators. “There is no honor in this!” he told them. “This is not a warzone!”
Since the video was put on YouTube, it has netted almost 2.5 million views, and has become a rallying cry for those protesting police brutality.
On his radio show yesterday, hate radio host Glenn Beck mocked Thomas, implying that there was no police brutality that had taken place for him to be angry about. One of his co-hosts called Thomas just “one panicked man screaming”:
If Beck and the co-host had bothered to actually watch the video to its completion, they could see that Thomas explained that he had witnessed police brutality earlier and that he wanted to tell the police to stop using those same tactics — not that the police who were standing there were directly responsible for the behavior. But it seemed like Beck was all too eager to mock this Iraq veteran to study the facts first. (HT: vinnys025 YouTube account)
NFTOS
Since the video was put on YouTube, it has netted almost 2.5 million views, and has become a rallying cry for those protesting police brutality.
On his radio show yesterday, hate radio host Glenn Beck mocked Thomas, implying that there was no police brutality that had taken place for him to be angry about. One of his co-hosts called Thomas just “one panicked man screaming”:
BECK: The guy who was like there’s no honor in this, these people are unarmed, there’s no honor in this and I’m watching this [laughing] and I couldn’t take it anymore, because the video shows this Marine yelling [mocking crying voice] stop brutalizing, we’re unarmed! And the cops have their hands in their pockets. [...] They’re like, “We know, we’re standing here.”
CO-HOST: What, you want us to brutalize you, is that what you want?
OTHER CO-HOST: That video taken from the right angle is just one panicked man screaming. As long as you take that picture from one side, it’s pretty dramatic.
If Beck and the co-host had bothered to actually watch the video to its completion, they could see that Thomas explained that he had witnessed police brutality earlier and that he wanted to tell the police to stop using those same tactics — not that the police who were standing there were directly responsible for the behavior. But it seemed like Beck was all too eager to mock this Iraq veteran to study the facts first. (HT: vinnys025 YouTube account)
NFTOS
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Comparisons
Republican lawmakers have been raking President Obama over the coals due to what they call a “tsunami” of new government regulations. “Business owners are reluctant to create jobs today if they’re going to need to pay more tomorrow to comply with onerous new regulations,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). Obama’s “excessive regulations that unnecessarily increase costs” just “make it harder for our economy to create jobs,” said House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).
As with most GOP talking points, the facts tell a different story. A Bloomberg analysis of regulations reveals that Obama has approved fewer regulations than President George W. Bush “at this same point in their tenures, and the estimated costs of those rules haven’t reached the annual peak set in fiscal 1992 under Bush’s father.” Indeed, the record for the most expensive regulations still belongs to the GOP:
More of Obama’s regulations may cost more than $100 million as compared to previous administrations. But many of them help prevent outcomes that would cost exponentially more. For instance, the Department of Interior’s new controls on deep-water oil drilling may cost the industry $180 million, but one oil spill like that caused by Deepwater Horizon could cost the industry $16.3 billion. Some of the administration’s rules, like those governing coal ash, will actually help create thousands of jobs.
The impact of these regulations on small businesses is incredibly minimal. In fact, of the 10,361 mass layoffs last year, only 61 were attributed to regulations. When McClatchy asked small business owners why they have been hesitant to hire, “none of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it.”
NFTOS
We certainly don’t remember Republicans crying about the “excessive” Bush regulations.
As with most GOP talking points, the facts tell a different story. A Bloomberg analysis of regulations reveals that Obama has approved fewer regulations than President George W. Bush “at this same point in their tenures, and the estimated costs of those rules haven’t reached the annual peak set in fiscal 1992 under Bush’s father.” Indeed, the record for the most expensive regulations still belongs to the GOP:
Obama’s White House approved 613 federal rules during the first 33 months of his term, 4.7 percent fewer than the 643 cleared by President George W. Bush’s administration in the same time frame, according to an Office of Management and Budget statistical database reviewed by Bloomberg.
In the last 12 months through the end of September, the cost range of new regulations is estimated to be $8 billion to $9 billion, a decrease from 2010, according to non-partisan Government Accountability Office reports analyzed by Bloomberg…The record [cost of regulations] came in 1992 under George H.W. Bush when that total hit $20.9 billion in current dollars. In the last year of Ronald Reagan’s term it was $16 billion in today’s dollars.
More of Obama’s regulations may cost more than $100 million as compared to previous administrations. But many of them help prevent outcomes that would cost exponentially more. For instance, the Department of Interior’s new controls on deep-water oil drilling may cost the industry $180 million, but one oil spill like that caused by Deepwater Horizon could cost the industry $16.3 billion. Some of the administration’s rules, like those governing coal ash, will actually help create thousands of jobs.
The impact of these regulations on small businesses is incredibly minimal. In fact, of the 10,361 mass layoffs last year, only 61 were attributed to regulations. When McClatchy asked small business owners why they have been hesitant to hire, “none of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it.”
NFTOS
We certainly don’t remember Republicans crying about the “excessive” Bush regulations.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Tea Bagger Class 101
Don’t attempt to take a courthouse hostage and conduct citizen’s arrest.
Birther Oathkeeper convicted in attempted courthouse takeover.
Georgia birther and Oathkeeper Darren Huff was convicted Tuesday of attempting to take over a Tennessee courthouse and conduct citizen’s arrests on officials.
After a week-long trial, a jury convicted Huff of knowingly carrying a firearm in interstate commerce with the intent to use it in a civil disorder, but acquitted him of using a firearm in relation to another felony, CBS News reports.
The decision came after the jury announced last night that it was hung.
Huff will be sentenced in February. He faces up to five years in prison.
In his trial last week, Huff teared up on the stand when he said: “my government has called me a potential domestic terrorist.”
“It’s hard to get employment when you’re under federal indictment,” Huff also said. “I refuse to be intimidated. All I can do is still have a voice.”
As the story goes:
Huff’s troubles began in April 2010, when Walter Francis Fitzpatrick was arrested in Madisonville, Tennessee for attempting to conduct a citizens’ arrest on Monroe County Grand Jury Foreman Gary Pettway. “I’m charging you with official misconduct,” Fitzpatrick told Pettway. “I’m placing you under arrest. You must now come with me.” Fitzpatrick was charged with inciting a riot, disrupting an official public meeting, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.
Beforehand, Fitzpatrick, who is a leader of the birther and Patriot group American Grand Jury, had written up 24 citizens’ arrest warrants for officials at the federal, state and local levels, calling them “domestic enemies” and describing President Obama as an “illegal alien, infiltrator and impostor.” His grievance with Pettway, it seems, was that Pettway would not agree to convene a grand jury to investigate the AGC’s belief that Obama is not a natural-born citizen.
Fitzpatrick’s allies called for supporters to storm the courthouse and conduct their own citizens’ arrests in retaliation for Fitzpatrick’s arrest, and Huff — carrying a Colt .45 and an AK-47 — responded to the request.
Huff, a former U.S. Naval officer from Georgia and a member of the OathKeepers, made his way to the courthouse on April 20, 2010, the day Fitzpatrick was supposed to stand trial.
Huff told the troopers that he was not planning in resorting to violence unless provoked, but he was ready to die for his rights and what he believed in, according to court documents. He was arrested a few days after, and was eventually indicted knowingly “carrying a firearm in interstate commerce with the intent to use it in a civil disorder” and “using a firearm in relation to another felony,” according to the AP.
The menatality of those whom dawn the "Don't tread on me" flag. Gen Gadsden would be appalled!
NFTOS
Birther Oathkeeper convicted in attempted courthouse takeover.
 |
| Darren Huff Fails Tea bag 101 |
Georgia birther and Oathkeeper Darren Huff was convicted Tuesday of attempting to take over a Tennessee courthouse and conduct citizen’s arrests on officials.
After a week-long trial, a jury convicted Huff of knowingly carrying a firearm in interstate commerce with the intent to use it in a civil disorder, but acquitted him of using a firearm in relation to another felony, CBS News reports.
The decision came after the jury announced last night that it was hung.
Huff will be sentenced in February. He faces up to five years in prison.
In his trial last week, Huff teared up on the stand when he said: “my government has called me a potential domestic terrorist.”
“It’s hard to get employment when you’re under federal indictment,” Huff also said. “I refuse to be intimidated. All I can do is still have a voice.”
As the story goes:
Huff’s troubles began in April 2010, when Walter Francis Fitzpatrick was arrested in Madisonville, Tennessee for attempting to conduct a citizens’ arrest on Monroe County Grand Jury Foreman Gary Pettway. “I’m charging you with official misconduct,” Fitzpatrick told Pettway. “I’m placing you under arrest. You must now come with me.” Fitzpatrick was charged with inciting a riot, disrupting an official public meeting, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.
Beforehand, Fitzpatrick, who is a leader of the birther and Patriot group American Grand Jury, had written up 24 citizens’ arrest warrants for officials at the federal, state and local levels, calling them “domestic enemies” and describing President Obama as an “illegal alien, infiltrator and impostor.” His grievance with Pettway, it seems, was that Pettway would not agree to convene a grand jury to investigate the AGC’s belief that Obama is not a natural-born citizen.
Fitzpatrick’s allies called for supporters to storm the courthouse and conduct their own citizens’ arrests in retaliation for Fitzpatrick’s arrest, and Huff — carrying a Colt .45 and an AK-47 — responded to the request.
Huff, a former U.S. Naval officer from Georgia and a member of the OathKeepers, made his way to the courthouse on April 20, 2010, the day Fitzpatrick was supposed to stand trial.
Huff told the troopers that he was not planning in resorting to violence unless provoked, but he was ready to die for his rights and what he believed in, according to court documents. He was arrested a few days after, and was eventually indicted knowingly “carrying a firearm in interstate commerce with the intent to use it in a civil disorder” and “using a firearm in relation to another felony,” according to the AP.
The menatality of those whom dawn the "Don't tread on me" flag. Gen Gadsden would be appalled!
NFTOS
Herman Cain In His Own Words
According to the new CBS News/New York Times poll, Herman Cain remains on top of the GOP field, capturing 25 percent of Republican primary voters, with Mitt Romney winning 21 percent. With his arrival at the forefront of the race for the Republican nomination for president, it’s important to reiterate that the former pizza czar holds some unconventional and extreme views. So, in honor of his particular numerical preference, a compilation video on the nine craziest positions Cain has staked out since his arrival in the public eye.
NFTOS
NFTOS
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Eye Of Newt Flip Flops Again
Gingrich suggests Obama is ushering ‘Defeat’ In Iraq, two days after saying he’s ‘right’ to withdraw.
The GOP presidential candidates came out swinging at President Obama after he announced last week that he would follow through with President Bush’s 2008 agreement to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of this year. Further validating the point that the Republican party is completely lost on foreign policy issues, their attacks haven’t really made much sense. Rick Santorum said Obama lost the Iraq war and Michele Bachmann charged that Obama is a failure because the Iraqis don’t respect him.
Newt Gingrich took the charade a bit further this weekend. On Friday, Gingrich told a reporter in Florida that Obama’s decision was the right one:
In 2006, Gingrich decided that it was an “enormous mistake” to occupy Iraq after taking Baghdad in 2003, despite the fact that up until that point, he’d been a vocal supporter of the war. And now, Gingrich is again trying to have it both ways, staking out the popular position in saying that Obama was “right” to pull all U.S. troops out of Iraq, but then pandering to the right-wing base, suggesting that his decision means defeat.
NFTOS
The GOP presidential candidates came out swinging at President Obama after he announced last week that he would follow through with President Bush’s 2008 agreement to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of this year. Further validating the point that the Republican party is completely lost on foreign policy issues, their attacks haven’t really made much sense. Rick Santorum said Obama lost the Iraq war and Michele Bachmann charged that Obama is a failure because the Iraqis don’t respect him.
Newt Gingrich took the charade a bit further this weekend. On Friday, Gingrich told a reporter in Florida that Obama’s decision was the right one:
“This is not about Obama,” he continued. “This is about the general effort that far transcends Iraq. That we have to really reassess our strategies in the region and what we think we’re accomplished. The president is right. You can’t just leave 3,000 or 5,000 troops there. They would simply become targets. If you’re not going to occupy the country, you have to withdraw.”Yet two days later, in a speech at the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition’s presidential candidate forum, Gingrich suggested that Obama is ushering defeat by withdrawing:
GINGRICH: The president has announced what will be seen by historians as a decisive defeat for the U.S. in Iraq. … After eight years, thousands of lives, hundreds of billions of dollars, we will leave in defeat. Don’t kid yourself, it is defeat. Iran is stronger.
In 2006, Gingrich decided that it was an “enormous mistake” to occupy Iraq after taking Baghdad in 2003, despite the fact that up until that point, he’d been a vocal supporter of the war. And now, Gingrich is again trying to have it both ways, staking out the popular position in saying that Obama was “right” to pull all U.S. troops out of Iraq, but then pandering to the right-wing base, suggesting that his decision means defeat.
NFTOS
Monday, October 24, 2011
Pat Buchanan a Racist?
Twelve racist or crazy quotes from Pat Buchanan’s new book.
Pundit and MSNBC contributor Pat Buchanan’s new book, “Suicide Of A Superpower,” is a veritable treasure trove of eye-popping assertions about the decline of America at the hand of increased diversity and multiculturalism.
Here are some highlights from the racist, I mean Pat Buchannan.
From the Preface:
When the faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, the people die. That is the progression. And as the faith that gave birth to the West is dying in the West, peoples of European descent from the steppes of Russia to the coast of California have begun to die out, as the Third World treks north to claim the estate. The last decade provided corroborating if not conclusive proof that we are in the Indian summer of our civilization.
From the chapter, “The Death Of Christian America”:
Obama’s White House thus enlisted in the long and successful campaign to expel Christianity from the public square, diminish its presence in our public life, and reduce its role to that of just another religion.
From the chapter, “The End Of White America”:
The white population will begin to shrink and, should present birth rates persist, slowly disappear. Hispanics already comprise 42 percent of New Mexico’s population, 37 percent of California’s, 38 percent of Texas’s, and over half the population of Arizona under the age of twenty. ……. Mexico is moving north. Ethnically, linguistically, and culturally, the verdict of 1848 is being overturned. Will this Mexican nation within a nation advance the goals of the Constitution—to “insure domestic tranquility” and “make us a more perfect union”? Or has our passivity in the face of this invasion imperiled our union?
Half a century after Martin Luther King envisioned a day when his children would be judged ‘not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character,’ journalists of color are demanding the hiring and promotion of journalists based on the color of their skin. Jim Crow is back. Only the color of the beneficiaries and the color of the victims has been reversed.
Also from the chapter, “The End Of White America”:
Those who believe the rise to power of an Obama rainbow coalition of peoples of color means the whites who helped to engineer it will steer it are deluding themselves. The whites may discover what it is like to ride in the back of the bus.
From the chapter, “Equality or Freedom?”:
Not until the 1960s did courts begin to use the Fourteenth Amendment to impose a concept of equality that the authors of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, The Federalist Papers, and the Gettysburg Address never believed in. Before the 1960s, equality meant every citizen enjoyed the same constitutional rights and the equal protection of existing laws. Nothing in the Constitution or federal law mandated social racial, or gender equality.
From the chapter “The Diversity Cult”:
Americans who seek stricter immigration control have been charged with many social sins: racism, xenophobia, nativism. Yet none has sought to expel any fellow American based on color or creed. We have only sought to preserve the country we grew up in. Do not people everywhere do that, without being reviled? What motivates people who insist that America’s doors be held open wide until the European majority has disappeared?
What is their grudge against the old America that eats at their heart?
On crime:
If [conservative political commentator Heather] Mac Donald’s statistics are accurate, 49 of every 50 muggings and murders in New York are the work of minorities. That might explain why black folks have trouble getting a cab. Every New York cabby must know the odds, should he pick up a man of color at night.
From the chapter “‘The White Party’”:
What the above points to is a strategy from which Republicans will recoil, a strategy to increase the GOP share of the white Christian vote and increase the turnout of that vote by specific appeals to social, cultural, and moral issues, and for equal justice for the emerging white minority. If the GOP is not the party of New Haven firefighter Frank Ricci and Cambridge cop James Crowley, it has no future. And although Howard Dean disparages the Republicans as the “white party,” why should Republicans be ashamed to represent the progeny of the men who founded, built, and defended America since her birth as a nation?
From the chapter “The Last Chance”:
Our intellectual, cultural, and political elites are today engaged in one of the most audacious and ambitious experiments in history. They are trying to transform a Western Christian republic into an egalitarian democracy made up of all the tribes, races, creeds, and cultures of planet Earth. They have dethroned our God, purged our cradle faith from public life, and repudiated the Judeo-Christian moral code by which previous generations sought to live.
From the same chapter:
For the Left to concede that white anger is a legitimate response to racial injustices done to white people would be to concede that the Left is guilty of the very sin of which it accuses the right.
On the segregation era:
Perhaps some of us misremember the past. But the racial, religious, cultural, social, political, and economic divides today seem greater than they seemed even in the segregation cities some of us grew up in.
If it walks like a duck and..........................
NFTOS
Pundit and MSNBC contributor Pat Buchanan’s new book, “Suicide Of A Superpower,” is a veritable treasure trove of eye-popping assertions about the decline of America at the hand of increased diversity and multiculturalism.
Here are some highlights from the racist, I mean Pat Buchannan.
From the Preface:
When the faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, the people die. That is the progression. And as the faith that gave birth to the West is dying in the West, peoples of European descent from the steppes of Russia to the coast of California have begun to die out, as the Third World treks north to claim the estate. The last decade provided corroborating if not conclusive proof that we are in the Indian summer of our civilization.
From the chapter, “The Death Of Christian America”:
Obama’s White House thus enlisted in the long and successful campaign to expel Christianity from the public square, diminish its presence in our public life, and reduce its role to that of just another religion.
From the chapter, “The End Of White America”:
The white population will begin to shrink and, should present birth rates persist, slowly disappear. Hispanics already comprise 42 percent of New Mexico’s population, 37 percent of California’s, 38 percent of Texas’s, and over half the population of Arizona under the age of twenty. ……. Mexico is moving north. Ethnically, linguistically, and culturally, the verdict of 1848 is being overturned. Will this Mexican nation within a nation advance the goals of the Constitution—to “insure domestic tranquility” and “make us a more perfect union”? Or has our passivity in the face of this invasion imperiled our union?
Half a century after Martin Luther King envisioned a day when his children would be judged ‘not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character,’ journalists of color are demanding the hiring and promotion of journalists based on the color of their skin. Jim Crow is back. Only the color of the beneficiaries and the color of the victims has been reversed.
Also from the chapter, “The End Of White America”:
Those who believe the rise to power of an Obama rainbow coalition of peoples of color means the whites who helped to engineer it will steer it are deluding themselves. The whites may discover what it is like to ride in the back of the bus.
From the chapter, “Equality or Freedom?”:
Not until the 1960s did courts begin to use the Fourteenth Amendment to impose a concept of equality that the authors of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, The Federalist Papers, and the Gettysburg Address never believed in. Before the 1960s, equality meant every citizen enjoyed the same constitutional rights and the equal protection of existing laws. Nothing in the Constitution or federal law mandated social racial, or gender equality.
From the chapter “The Diversity Cult”:
Americans who seek stricter immigration control have been charged with many social sins: racism, xenophobia, nativism. Yet none has sought to expel any fellow American based on color or creed. We have only sought to preserve the country we grew up in. Do not people everywhere do that, without being reviled? What motivates people who insist that America’s doors be held open wide until the European majority has disappeared?
What is their grudge against the old America that eats at their heart?
On crime:
If [conservative political commentator Heather] Mac Donald’s statistics are accurate, 49 of every 50 muggings and murders in New York are the work of minorities. That might explain why black folks have trouble getting a cab. Every New York cabby must know the odds, should he pick up a man of color at night.
From the chapter “‘The White Party’”:
What the above points to is a strategy from which Republicans will recoil, a strategy to increase the GOP share of the white Christian vote and increase the turnout of that vote by specific appeals to social, cultural, and moral issues, and for equal justice for the emerging white minority. If the GOP is not the party of New Haven firefighter Frank Ricci and Cambridge cop James Crowley, it has no future. And although Howard Dean disparages the Republicans as the “white party,” why should Republicans be ashamed to represent the progeny of the men who founded, built, and defended America since her birth as a nation?
From the chapter “The Last Chance”:
Our intellectual, cultural, and political elites are today engaged in one of the most audacious and ambitious experiments in history. They are trying to transform a Western Christian republic into an egalitarian democracy made up of all the tribes, races, creeds, and cultures of planet Earth. They have dethroned our God, purged our cradle faith from public life, and repudiated the Judeo-Christian moral code by which previous generations sought to live.
From the same chapter:
For the Left to concede that white anger is a legitimate response to racial injustices done to white people would be to concede that the Left is guilty of the very sin of which it accuses the right.
On the segregation era:
Perhaps some of us misremember the past. But the racial, religious, cultural, social, political, and economic divides today seem greater than they seemed even in the segregation cities some of us grew up in.
"Back then black and white lived apart, went to different schools and churches, played on different playgrounds, and went to different restaurants, bars, theaters, and soda fountains. But we shared a country and a culture. We were one nation. We were Americans."
If it walks like a duck and..........................
NFTOS
Friday, October 21, 2011
Radical Teas Will Ask For Anything To Ensure Obama Doesn't Get Second Term
Radical Tea Bags urges small businesses ‘Not To Hire A Single Person’ to hurt Obama.
Congressional Republicans have acted shocked and offended at Democrats’ suggestions that they are intentionally sabotaging the economy to try to win back the White House in 2012. Republicans have refused to pass President Obama’s jobs plan — which experts estimate will create at least 1.9 million jobs — and proposed an alternative plan that Moody’s says “will likely push the economy back into recession.”
Now influential Tea Party leaders are throwing caution to the wind and openly lobbying business owners to stop hiring in order to hurt Obama politically. This week, Right Wing Watch picked up on a message Tea Party Nation sent to their members from conservative activist Melissa Brookstone.
In a rambling letter titled “Call For A Strike of American Small Businesses Against The Movement for Global Socialism,” Brookstone urges businesses “not hire a single person” to protest “this new dictator”:
Brookstone cites Democrats’ support of the Occupy Wall Street movement as proof that Obama, media elites, and the like are “against business, private property ownership and capitalism.” Although she fails to explain how a freeze on hiring would send a bold pro-business message, given that such a boycott would further damage the economy and exacerbate high national unemployment.
But these Tea Partiers are only too happy to put politics ahead of the well-being of 14 million unemployed Americans, not to mention the businesses who are looking for qualified workers.
NFTOS
Congressional Republicans have acted shocked and offended at Democrats’ suggestions that they are intentionally sabotaging the economy to try to win back the White House in 2012. Republicans have refused to pass President Obama’s jobs plan — which experts estimate will create at least 1.9 million jobs — and proposed an alternative plan that Moody’s says “will likely push the economy back into recession.”
Now influential Tea Party leaders are throwing caution to the wind and openly lobbying business owners to stop hiring in order to hurt Obama politically. This week, Right Wing Watch picked up on a message Tea Party Nation sent to their members from conservative activist Melissa Brookstone.
In a rambling letter titled “Call For A Strike of American Small Businesses Against The Movement for Global Socialism,” Brookstone urges businesses “not hire a single person” to protest “this new dictator”:
Resolved that: The current administration and Democrat majority in the Senate, in conjunction with Progressive socialists from all around the country, especially those from Hollywood and the left leaning news media (Indeed, most of the news media.) have worked in unison to advance an anti-business, an anti-free market, and an anti-capitalist (anti-individual rights and property ownership) agenda.
I, an American small business owner, part of the class that produces the vast majority of real, wealth producing jobs in this country, hereby resolve that I will not hire a single person until this war against business and my country is stopped.
Brookstone cites Democrats’ support of the Occupy Wall Street movement as proof that Obama, media elites, and the like are “against business, private property ownership and capitalism.” Although she fails to explain how a freeze on hiring would send a bold pro-business message, given that such a boycott would further damage the economy and exacerbate high national unemployment.
But these Tea Partiers are only too happy to put politics ahead of the well-being of 14 million unemployed Americans, not to mention the businesses who are looking for qualified workers.
NFTOS
Thursday, October 20, 2011
"Don't Play Our Music On Your Evil ... Channel Ever Again"
In a post on his Twitter feed, Adam Levine, lead singer of pop rock band Maroon 5, commanded Fox News to stop playing its music on air, writing: "Dear Fox News, don't play our music on your evil f****** channel ever again. Thank you." From the post:
Indeed, on the October 17 edition of Fox News' early morning show, Fox & Friends, Fox played an excerpt from the 2004 Maroon 5 hit "She Will Be Loved" from the band's album Songs About Jane. The song can be heard playing as co-host Steve Doocy teases a story about a cheerleader who fell into a swimming pool at the Pan Am Games in Mexico. As the song is playing, text on the top-left corner of the screen reads: " 'She Will Be Loved' Maroon 5." The show then went to commercial.
Rolling Stone reported today that “when reached by Rolling Stone, Levine's representative declined to comment."
Levine has previously lashed out at Fox. In August, Out Magazine reported Levine's criticism of the top-rated Fox program American Idol for allegedly talking contestant Adam Lambert out of coming out publicly during the show's run:
Fox isn't the only network Levine has lambasted on Twitter. Before MTV's Video Music Awards in August, he accused the channel of caring about music only "one day a year."
NFTOS
Indeed, on the October 17 edition of Fox News' early morning show, Fox & Friends, Fox played an excerpt from the 2004 Maroon 5 hit "She Will Be Loved" from the band's album Songs About Jane. The song can be heard playing as co-host Steve Doocy teases a story about a cheerleader who fell into a swimming pool at the Pan Am Games in Mexico. As the song is playing, text on the top-left corner of the screen reads: " 'She Will Be Loved' Maroon 5." The show then went to commercial.
Rolling Stone reported today that “when reached by Rolling Stone, Levine's representative declined to comment."
Levine has previously lashed out at Fox. In August, Out Magazine reported Levine's criticism of the top-rated Fox program American Idol for allegedly talking contestant Adam Lambert out of coming out publicly during the show's run:
"What's always pissed me off about Idol is wanting to mask that, for that to go unspoken. C'mon. You can't be publicly gay? At this point? On a singing competition? Give me a break. You can't hide basic components of these people's lives. The fact that The Voice didn't have any qualms about being completely open about it is a great thing."Levine called Fox "immature" in a November 2009 tweet and the "most poisonous network on earth" in August 2010. In that latter tweet, he added: "I think I need a shower."
Fox isn't the only network Levine has lambasted on Twitter. Before MTV's Video Music Awards in August, he accused the channel of caring about music only "one day a year."
NFTOS
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Not Ready For Prime Time
After confusing himself, Cain decides that rape victims should be forced to carry pregnancies to term.
Newly emerged GOP presidential frontrunner Herman Cain does not do well under public scrutiny. He has “no idea” how his gimmicky 999 tax plan works in practice. He mixes up our nation’s founding documents. And his weak grasp of foreign policy even inspired his fellow GOP contender Newt Gingrich to worry that Cain is “not ready for prime time.”
So it probably should be surprising that last week Cain actually managed to confuse himself — and everyone at Fox Business’s Stossel show — over a much more basic yes or no question: Should abortion be legal?
At first, Cain offered a simple answer: “I’m pro-life from conception, yes.” But when host Stossel asked whether there are any cases in which abortion should be legal (such as rape or incest), Cain then declared, “I don’t think government should make that decision.” Recognizing the conflict, Stossel endeavored to clear up exactly where Cain stood on abortion — an attempt that led Cain to completely contradict himself by offering three different positions. He began with his anti-choice stance.
Cain has tried to have it both ways on an issue before. But his struggle to fully reject a sexual assault victim’s freedom offers a window into just how radical this increasingly common position among the right-wing is. Not only does such a blind position defy the constitution, it callously robs a victim who had no choice in whether or not to be assaulted her last remaining choice in regards to her own body. It is also important to note that Cain’s “life at conception” policy could criminalize pregnancy prevention methods for women as well.
Cain is no closer to figuring out exactly how he feels about this ludicrously radical position. On NBC Sunday, he declared that abortions should be illegal “under any circumstance” even in cases of rape or incest. However, when asked about whether the procedure should be allowed to save the life of the mother, he once again deviated from his position. “If it’s the life of the mother, that family is going to have to make that decision.”
NFTOS
Newly emerged GOP presidential frontrunner Herman Cain does not do well under public scrutiny. He has “no idea” how his gimmicky 999 tax plan works in practice. He mixes up our nation’s founding documents. And his weak grasp of foreign policy even inspired his fellow GOP contender Newt Gingrich to worry that Cain is “not ready for prime time.”
So it probably should be surprising that last week Cain actually managed to confuse himself — and everyone at Fox Business’s Stossel show — over a much more basic yes or no question: Should abortion be legal?
At first, Cain offered a simple answer: “I’m pro-life from conception, yes.” But when host Stossel asked whether there are any cases in which abortion should be legal (such as rape or incest), Cain then declared, “I don’t think government should make that decision.” Recognizing the conflict, Stossel endeavored to clear up exactly where Cain stood on abortion — an attempt that led Cain to completely contradict himself by offering three different positions. He began with his anti-choice stance.
CAIN: “Even if she is raped or she is the victim of incest because there are other options. We must protect the sanctity of life and I have always believed that.”
Cain has tried to have it both ways on an issue before. But his struggle to fully reject a sexual assault victim’s freedom offers a window into just how radical this increasingly common position among the right-wing is. Not only does such a blind position defy the constitution, it callously robs a victim who had no choice in whether or not to be assaulted her last remaining choice in regards to her own body. It is also important to note that Cain’s “life at conception” policy could criminalize pregnancy prevention methods for women as well.
Cain is no closer to figuring out exactly how he feels about this ludicrously radical position. On NBC Sunday, he declared that abortions should be illegal “under any circumstance” even in cases of rape or incest. However, when asked about whether the procedure should be allowed to save the life of the mother, he once again deviated from his position. “If it’s the life of the mother, that family is going to have to make that decision.”
NFTOS
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
From The Pulpit Of Herman Cain
Herman Cain claimed that a ‘Liberal Court’ killed Jesus.
Daily Kos’s bernardpliers recalls a Herman Cain column from December 2010 where the GOP presidential primary candidate appears to complain that Jesus was killed by liberals.
In a column and blog post titled “The Perfect Conservative,” Cain makes the claim that Jesus was politically conservative and that he “helped the poor without one government program.” After running through a list of reasons Cain believes Jesus to be a model right-winger, the presidential contender concludes that the “liberal court” was responsible for his death:
NFTOS
Daily Kos’s bernardpliers recalls a Herman Cain column from December 2010 where the GOP presidential primary candidate appears to complain that Jesus was killed by liberals.
In a column and blog post titled “The Perfect Conservative,” Cain makes the claim that Jesus was politically conservative and that he “helped the poor without one government program.” After running through a list of reasons Cain believes Jesus to be a model right-winger, the presidential contender concludes that the “liberal court” was responsible for his death:
The liberal court found Him guilty of false offences and sentenced Him to death, all because He changed the hearts and minds of men with an army of 12. His death reset the clock of time. Never before and not since has there ever been such a perfect conservative.Cain does not explain why he finds the Roman court that sentenced and executed Jesus to be “liberal.” But his claim is baffling for all kinds of reasons, only one of which is the fact that liberals tend to be ideologically opposed to capital punishment while conservatives tend to favor it.
NFTOS
Monday, October 17, 2011
Koch Brothers Flout Law
AIPAC Gives Koch A Pass For Flouting Iran Sanctions.
Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported that Koch Industries had been flouting U.S. sanctions with Iran when the company sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to the Islamic Republic over several years. But the powerful pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC — which has for years been one of the most vocal proponents of tougher sanctions on Iran — has given the conservative mega-corporation a pass for dealing with the country.
As Politico’s Ben Smith reports, in a memo AIPAC sent to members of Congress with suggested questions for Obama administration officials, the Israel lobby suggests it is uninterested in holding Koch accountable (the memo presents questions lawmakers could use, so “I” represents the congressman):
“Every single chance they had to do business with Iran, or anyone else, they did,” said George Bentu, a former employee of Koch-Glitsch, a German Koch subsidiary which did much of the company’s business with Iran. The company “took elaborate steps” to sidestep the sanctions, Bloomberg reported.
But apparently to AIPAC, Koch is off the hook because they stopped trading with terror-sponsor Iran in 2007. This seems a little disingenuous, since U.S. companies have been banned from trading with Iran since 1995. One would think AIPAC would condemn any company that did business with Iran, especially after elements of the country’s government have been tied to a potential assassination plot against Israeli and Saudi officials, instead of going out of their way to defend them.
NFTOS
Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported that Koch Industries had been flouting U.S. sanctions with Iran when the company sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to the Islamic Republic over several years. But the powerful pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC — which has for years been one of the most vocal proponents of tougher sanctions on Iran — has given the conservative mega-corporation a pass for dealing with the country.
As Politico’s Ben Smith reports, in a memo AIPAC sent to members of Congress with suggested questions for Obama administration officials, the Israel lobby suggests it is uninterested in holding Koch accountable (the memo presents questions lawmakers could use, so “I” represents the congressman):
“Every single chance they had to do business with Iran, or anyone else, they did,” said George Bentu, a former employee of Koch-Glitsch, a German Koch subsidiary which did much of the company’s business with Iran. The company “took elaborate steps” to sidestep the sanctions, Bloomberg reported.
Last week, the Bloomberg Markets Magazine ran a story titled, “Koch Brothers Flout Law Getting Richer With Secret Iran Sales.” The article alleges that a foreign subsidiary of the U.S.company, Koch Industries Inc., sold petrochemical equipment to Iran. My concern today is not with the Koch Brothers. That company did the right thing in 2007 and voluntarily ended all of its subsidiary’s business in Iran. However, I am concerned that other American companies continue to use foreign subsidiaries to profit from sales to Iran, and it is completely legal.
Do you know which American companies have foreign subsidiaries conducting business with Iran that would be illegal for their parent companies to do? Do you do anything to discourage this practice?
But apparently to AIPAC, Koch is off the hook because they stopped trading with terror-sponsor Iran in 2007. This seems a little disingenuous, since U.S. companies have been banned from trading with Iran since 1995. One would think AIPAC would condemn any company that did business with Iran, especially after elements of the country’s government have been tied to a potential assassination plot against Israeli and Saudi officials, instead of going out of their way to defend them.
NFTOS
Friday, October 14, 2011
Rick Perry Just Doesn’t Get It
Ignoring world wars and 9/11, Perry says ‘the world has never been as dangerous as it is today’ because of Obama.
Appearing on Bill Bennett’s radio show yesterday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) lambasted President Obama’s foreign policy as “incredibly naive,” saying, “the world has never been as dangerous as it is today, because of this administration”:
It’s unclear how Perry sees today as more dangerous than any other point in the nation’s history, which has experienced foreign invasion, two world wars, the threat of nuclear annihilation during the Cold War, and the 9/11 terror attacks. Moreover, the number of armed conflicts globally is low and falling. It’s also unclear how Perry thinks — the day after the Obama administration foiled a terror plot from Iran — that the president has been too soft on rogue nations. It’s hard to see how Perry isn’t the “incredibly naive” one here.
NFTOS
Appearing on Bill Bennett’s radio show yesterday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) lambasted President Obama’s foreign policy as “incredibly naive,” saying, “the world has never been as dangerous as it is today, because of this administration”:
PERRY: So, you’ve got a president of the United States that I think is either incredibly naive about foreign policy or I don’t know else to take out of it. They’re aimless, they’re wavering, and I know this — the world has never been as dangerous as it is today, because of this administration’s lack of focus on dealing with these rogue nations.
It’s unclear how Perry sees today as more dangerous than any other point in the nation’s history, which has experienced foreign invasion, two world wars, the threat of nuclear annihilation during the Cold War, and the 9/11 terror attacks. Moreover, the number of armed conflicts globally is low and falling. It’s also unclear how Perry thinks — the day after the Obama administration foiled a terror plot from Iran — that the president has been too soft on rogue nations. It’s hard to see how Perry isn’t the “incredibly naive” one here.
NFTOS
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Wall Street Occupation Popular...Radical Tea Not So
FACT: Americans support occupy Wall Street, oppose tea party.
The new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that Americans support the Occupy Wall Street protests by a two-to-one margin (37 percent in favor, 18 percent opposed) while more Americans view the Tea Party negatively (28 percent in favor, 41 percent opposed). This means the Occupy Wall Street protests have a net favorability of +19 percent while the Tea Party has a net favorability of -13 percent, as this chart produced by ThinkProgress shows:
A new Time Magazine poll found an even more positive results for Occupy Wall Street, showing 54 percent held a favorable view of the movement, compared to just 27 percent with a favorable view of the Tea Party. In the Time poll, just 23 percent had an unfavorable view of Occupy Wall street, for a net rating of +31 percent. Meanwhile, 33 percent had an unfavorable view of the Tea Party, giving it a net rating of -6 percent.
NFTOS
The new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that Americans support the Occupy Wall Street protests by a two-to-one margin (37 percent in favor, 18 percent opposed) while more Americans view the Tea Party negatively (28 percent in favor, 41 percent opposed). This means the Occupy Wall Street protests have a net favorability of +19 percent while the Tea Party has a net favorability of -13 percent, as this chart produced by ThinkProgress shows:
 |
| Chart by thinkprogress.com |
NFTOS
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Limbaugh, Malkin, Loesch Oh My!
Rush “the drugster” Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin and Dana Loesch all step out before DOJ’s Eric Holder completes press conference.
Attorney General Eric Holder hadn't even stepped away from the podium of his press conference about an alleged Iranian terror plot before right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, CNN contributor Dana Loesch, and Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin began politicizing the announcement.
Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller took to the microphone this afternoon to deliver details about an alleged terror plot in which, according to a Justice Department press release, two individuals were "directed by elements of the Iranian government to murder the Saudi Ambassador to the United States with explosives while the Ambassador was in the United States." One of the plotters allegedly attempted to hire what he thought were members of a Mexican drug cartel to carry out the murder.
Limbaugh started smearing the event before the conference even began, telling his audience that Holder's announcement was "a great way to sidestep the fact that he's being delivered a subpoena on Fast and Furious," the failed ATF operation that is currently under DOJ and congressional investigation. Limbaugh added that the announcement was "all about" trying to give Holder "something to distract everybody away from Fast and Furious."
The press conference ended at 2:29 p.m. EST, but by 2:22 p.m., Loesch, too, was already politicizing Holder's comments on Twitter, trying to tie the alleged terrorists to Fast and Furious.
Malkin joined in as well, on Twitter and her blog, calling the announcement a "diversion" from Fast and Furious and saying she was not "fooled":
H.Y. Nahm is quoted as saying “Is Michelle Malkin a political thinker with a weakness for name-calling or an ambitious show woman selling righteous bitchery to titillate right-wingers”? Apparently Malkin has been pissing off many for years as a website created in 2006 shows a huge distaste for the radical loudmouth.
Of coarse what Faux News contributor wouldn’t come without theatrics? Maklin back in 07 had a riff with Geraldo over statements made.
Faux News had been grooming her for a long time. Faux News doesn't develop what they think is an asset and then suddenly drop it. This most extreme right wing blogger out there doesn't bite her tongue for no one, and like most radical tea bags, she has learned her craft and trade well.
Attorney General Eric Holder hadn't even stepped away from the podium of his press conference about an alleged Iranian terror plot before right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, CNN contributor Dana Loesch, and Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin began politicizing the announcement.
Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller took to the microphone this afternoon to deliver details about an alleged terror plot in which, according to a Justice Department press release, two individuals were "directed by elements of the Iranian government to murder the Saudi Ambassador to the United States with explosives while the Ambassador was in the United States." One of the plotters allegedly attempted to hire what he thought were members of a Mexican drug cartel to carry out the murder.
Limbaugh started smearing the event before the conference even began, telling his audience that Holder's announcement was "a great way to sidestep the fact that he's being delivered a subpoena on Fast and Furious," the failed ATF operation that is currently under DOJ and congressional investigation. Limbaugh added that the announcement was "all about" trying to give Holder "something to distract everybody away from Fast and Furious."
The press conference ended at 2:29 p.m. EST, but by 2:22 p.m., Loesch, too, was already politicizing Holder's comments on Twitter, trying to tie the alleged terrorists to Fast and Furious.
Malkin joined in as well, on Twitter and her blog, calling the announcement a "diversion" from Fast and Furious and saying she was not "fooled":
Sadly, this kind of rapid-reaction politicization of grave, apolitical events is well-worn territory for commenters on the right. Right-wing media rushed to attack the Obama administration in 2010 after an attempted New York City car bombing and reports of an attempted shoe bombing on a domestic flight over Denver. And in January 2010, Limbaugh said that President Obama wanted to use the devastating Haiti earthquake to boost credibility with the "light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country."
There are not three louder radical tea bags in America than these three. NFTOS has logged many hours researching ““the drugster” and Loesch’s radical rants. Malkin is one of many in to ooze out of Faux News’ pig sty. Malkin comes from the same mold as Ann Coulter (minus the Adams apple of course).
H.Y. Nahm is quoted as saying “Is Michelle Malkin a political thinker with a weakness for name-calling or an ambitious show woman selling righteous bitchery to titillate right-wingers”? Apparently Malkin has been pissing off many for years as a website created in 2006 shows a huge distaste for the radical loudmouth.
Of coarse what Faux News contributor wouldn’t come without theatrics? Maklin back in 07 had a riff with Geraldo over statements made.
Faux News had been grooming her for a long time. Faux News doesn't develop what they think is an asset and then suddenly drop it. This most extreme right wing blogger out there doesn't bite her tongue for no one, and like most radical tea bags, she has learned her craft and trade well.
NFTOS
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
POLL SHOWS
Two-Thirds Of Americans Want Higher Taxes On Wealthy:
More than two-thirds of Americans, including 53 percent of Republicans, want wealthier people to pay more in taxes to help pay down the deficit, according to a new Bloomberg-Washington Post poll. (The two news organizations are sponsoring tonight’s GOP debate.) “Even larger numbers think Medicare and Social Security benefits should be left alone.” As former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett has written, more than 20 recent polls show Americans favor raises taxes on the wealthy, despite conservative claims otherwise.
NFTOS
More than two-thirds of Americans, including 53 percent of Republicans, want wealthier people to pay more in taxes to help pay down the deficit, according to a new Bloomberg-Washington Post poll. (The two news organizations are sponsoring tonight’s GOP debate.) “Even larger numbers think Medicare and Social Security benefits should be left alone.” As former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett has written, more than 20 recent polls show Americans favor raises taxes on the wealthy, despite conservative claims otherwise.
NFTOS
Monday, October 10, 2011
Herman Cain’s Great Plan
Tax the poor people’s food to finance massive tax break for the rich.
The centerpiece of former pizza czar Herman Cain’s presidential campaign is his “999″ plan, which would slash taxes on the wealthy, drive up deficits to the worst point since World War II, and force low-income Americans to pay a massive nine times their current tax rate. In an interview this morning with CNN’s Candy Crowley, Cain even said food and clothing would not be exempt from the 9 percent national sales tax he would put in place if elected president. Indeed, he said it would be “fair” for a poor person to pay as much in sales taxes as Crowley does:
Because he says his plan would lower the income tax for some Americans — and, by his calculations, leave people with more money to spend — Cain seems to think his plan would leave low-income Americans with more money. He is wrong. Presently, the bottom quintile of earners pays about 2 percent of their income in federal taxes. Under Cain’s plan, their taxes would increase all the way up to 18 percent.
Taxing poor people’s food is considered so beyond the pale that even the Tea Party group FreedomWorks assumed that the final version of Cain’s tax plan would exempt food from the sales tax. Only two states, Mississippi and Alabama, charge sales tax on food.
This week, Cain said his plan would not be regressive because “It expands the base so that everybody has a lower rate. And it is not regressive on the poor.” Clearly, he is ignoring how his tax plan would actually affect hardworking Americans, especially when it comes to the food they buy so that they can feed their families.
NFTOS
The centerpiece of former pizza czar Herman Cain’s presidential campaign is his “999″ plan, which would slash taxes on the wealthy, drive up deficits to the worst point since World War II, and force low-income Americans to pay a massive nine times their current tax rate. In an interview this morning with CNN’s Candy Crowley, Cain even said food and clothing would not be exempt from the 9 percent national sales tax he would put in place if elected president. Indeed, he said it would be “fair” for a poor person to pay as much in sales taxes as Crowley does:
CROWLEY: Is there any exception, as you see it, in this consumption tax? Except for clothing, perhaps? Except for food?
CAIN: Nope, you don’t have to do that. Nope, you don’t have to do that.
CROWLEY: So a poor person is paying the same amount of taxes on groceries as I am? Does that sound fair to you, just in a vacuum?
CAIN: Yes, it does sound fair because of the other point I’m about to make. If they need to buy a car or a home or some hard goods that are used, they pay no taxes.
Because he says his plan would lower the income tax for some Americans — and, by his calculations, leave people with more money to spend — Cain seems to think his plan would leave low-income Americans with more money. He is wrong. Presently, the bottom quintile of earners pays about 2 percent of their income in federal taxes. Under Cain’s plan, their taxes would increase all the way up to 18 percent.
Taxing poor people’s food is considered so beyond the pale that even the Tea Party group FreedomWorks assumed that the final version of Cain’s tax plan would exempt food from the sales tax. Only two states, Mississippi and Alabama, charge sales tax on food.
This week, Cain said his plan would not be regressive because “It expands the base so that everybody has a lower rate. And it is not regressive on the poor.” Clearly, he is ignoring how his tax plan would actually affect hardworking Americans, especially when it comes to the food they buy so that they can feed their families.
NFTOS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)