Someone get Bobby Jindal on the phone for a comment.
When Republican wunderkind, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal gave his party’s response to President Obama’s speech before a joint session of Congress, he decried Democrats for passing a spending bill “larded with wasteful spending,” ...including "$140 million for something called “volcano monitoring.”
...Jindal is the governer of a state dependent on tens of billions of federal dollars to predict, prepare for and recover from natural disasters, and however exotic “volcano monitoring” may sound to his fellow bayou residents, he’s in no position to criticize disaster preparedness expenditures elsewhere.
...Dave Stricklan, a hydrometeorogical technician with the National Weather Service, expected very fine ash. … “The heavier stuff drops out very quickly, and then the other stuff filters out. There’s going to be a very fine amount of it that’s going to be suspended in the atmosphere for quite some time, but nothing to really affect anything such as aviation travel. The heavier stuff will filter out,” he said. Still, Alaska Airlines on Monday canceled 19 flights in and out of the Anchorage international airport because of the ash.
Because ash intake can damage jet engines, causing planes to, you know, crash. But I guess, as long as they’re not crashing in the bayou, it’s no big problem.
Washington Post business columnist Steven Pearlstein vehemently disagreed with Paul Krugman's analysis of President Obama's plan on MSNBC today.
Andrea Mitchell:Let me ask you about Paul Krugman in the New York Times today, because he, really even before the details were announced, he wrote, "The plan to use taxpayer funds to drive the prices of bad assets up to 'fair' levels... but the Geithner scheme would offer a one way bet; if asset values go up, the investors profit, but if they go down, the investors can walk away from their debt. So this isn't really about letting markets work. It's just an indirect, disguised way to subsidize purchases of bad assets."
Steve Pearlstein: Andrea? Flat. Out. Wrong. There is risk to the equity investors here. Obviously he either didn't understand the plan or didn't read it very carefully. Now do we limit their risk? Yes we do. Under the plan, yes we would and the reason for that is because if that wasn't necessary, then these markets would be working already. Clearly they're not working so we need to do something. You might call it a subsidy or you might call it providing some insurance, so yes we're doing that to jump-start these markets. And the hope is, that once these markets start to operate, the government can begin to withdraw, but right now you need something to prime the pump because there's no water coming out.
Here's why I like my new President. He tells people the truth. He tells people what the need to hear although it may not necessarity be what they want to hear.
President Obama sat down with Steve Kroft for a 60 Minutes interview to take his message directly to the American people. Yes, it's edited by CBS, but an extended interview is better than a 30 second sound bite from the cable chatter news networks.
Here's a question: Do you think another President would be honest enough admit to a fear of further "systemic risks" when interviewer Steve Kroft asked? I don't. I'm also happy that he got a chance to reply to the criticism Dick Cheney has been spewing of late, and exactly the reasons Cheney and the Bush administration were wrong when it came to the detainees at Guantanamo.
Here is the more complete response (bold indicates comments left out of video above):
"I fundamentally disagree with Dick Cheney. Not surprisingly. You know, I think that Vice President Cheney has been at the head of a movement whose notion is somehow that we can't reconcile our core values, our Constitution, our belief that we don't torture, with our national security interests. I think he's drawing the wrong lesson from history," Obama said.
"The facts don't bear him out. I think he is, that attitude, that philosophy has done incredible damage to our image and position in the world. I mean, the fact of the matter is after all these years how many convictions actually came out of Guantanamo? How many terrorists have actually been brought to justice under the philosophy that is being promoted by Vice President Cheney? It hasn't made us safer. What it has been is a great advertisement for anti-American sentiment. Which means that there is constant effective recruitment of Arab fighters and Muslim fighters against U.S. interests all around the world," he added.
"Some of it being organized by a few people who were released from Guantanamo," Kroft pointed out.
"Well, there is no doubt that we have not done a particularly effective job in sorting through who are truly dangerous individuals that we've got to make sure are not a threat to us, who are folks that we just swept up. The whole premise of Guantanamo promoted by Vice President Cheney was that somehow the American system of justice was not up to the task of dealing with these terrorists. I fundamentally disagree with that. Now, do these folks deserve Miranda rights? Do they deserve to be treated like a shoplifter down the block? Of course not," Obama said.
Asked what should be done with these people, Obama said, "Well, I think we're gonna have to figure out a mechanism to make sure that they not released and do us harm. But do so in a way that is consistent with both our traditions, sense of due process, international law. But this is the legacy that's been left behind. And, you know, I'm surprised that the vice president is eager to defend a legacy that was unsustainable. Let's assume that we didn't change these practices. How long are we gonna go? Are we gonna just keep on going until you know, the entire Muslim world and Arab world despises us? Do we think that's really gonna make us safer? I don't know a lot of thoughtful thinkers, liberal or conservative, who think that that was the right approach."
Of course, the only thing taken out of this interview by the right wing crazies today is that President Obama laughed and smiled through a couple of questions that were no laughing matter. Steve Kroft set them up for it, andthe wingnuts swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.
"You're sitting here. And you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people gonna look at this and say, 'I mean, he's sitting there just making jokes about money.' How do you deal with, I mean, explain the…mood and your laughter," Kroft asked. "Are you punch drunk?"
"No, no. There's gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day," Obama explained. "You know, sometimes my team talks about the fact that if you had said to us a year ago that the least of my problems would be Iraq, which is still a pretty serious problem, I don't think anybody would have believed it. But we've got a lot on our plate. And a lot of difficult decisions that we're gonna have to make."
Steve Benen notes that this should be put in perspective, and if you did watch the interview, this is exactly the perspective that I drew.
About half-way through, Kroft brings up aid to the auto industry, and public opposition to additional government investment. The two share a laugh at the one-sided polling numbers, which led to Kroft's question about "laughing." As Steve M. explained, "[I]t's obvious -- the chuckling is mutual as they agree about the extraordinary unpopularity of bailing out the auto industry."
When you see reports today about the president laughing at economic hardship, keep this in mind.
By now we all know that Bill O'Reilly is unofficially King of the Douchebags and if I really wanted to, I could find something each week that would put him at the top of the list. So I guess you can say being named Douchebag of the Week is judged on a curve. If you're normally a douchenozzle, it should take something pretty extraordinary to have the dubious distinction awarded to you. Well, never let it be said that Bill O'Reilly disappoints in this regard.
Bill O'Reilly's Boston Herald Op-Ed:The other day, left-wing muckraker Seymour Hersh went on MSNBC and said he had information, provided by the usual anonymous sources, that Dick Cheney was running an assassination squad out of the White House.
I have but one simple observation: If Cheney really had such a crew, Hersh would have been dead a long time ago, and so would most everybody at MSNBC.
If you can stomach the six remaining short paragraphs, O'Reilly feigns humor with possible "lefty" news headline predictions with a wild swing and a miss; this along with the comments section continue to add justifiable proof to the theory that conservatives have no sense of humor.
I watched President Obama's Tonight Show appearance with Jay Leno last night and I think he did a pretty good job. Reaching out to a television audience that isn't fixated to 24 hour cable news chatter and most likely not addicted to MSNBC or CNN, President Obama did a great job explaining the AIG bailout mess in clear, succinct, layman's terms for everyone to understand.
His one gaffe came toward the end of the interview when Leno asked him about his bowling skills. As he said that he'd been practicing and he bowled a 129, Leno sarcastically congratulated the President and amid the laughter and applause, Obama responded, "It's like the Special Olympics or something."
I had watched Countdown with Keith Olbermann previously and Olbermann had mentioned this possibly cringe inducing gaffe, but when watching the Leno interview, I have to admit that had I not been listening for it, I probably would have missed it as it was said in the middle of laughter and applause. Let's get one thing straight: the audience did not laugh at Obama's "joke" as some news articles suggest. They were already laughing and applauding at Leno making fun of the President's latest bowling score when he blurted out the unfortunate line. Here is the video.
Now there is yet more outrage from the right wing "teabaggers" about this line. All I had to do was go to Fox News online to see it as the headline on the main page. But let's break it down.
There is no excuse for what President Obama said. It was a dumb thing to say, and the President should be held to a higher standard. But if we're honest with ourselves, I think almost everyone has used some form of wording to imply mental or physical handicap in such a way. "Retard" (pronounced ree-tard) has been used forever until it became politically incorrect, but I occasionally still hear some older people and comedians use it. I remember using it in the playground as a kid and all through high school. It was another version of "dumbass" as far as I was concerned until you peel away what it really implies. "Duh" evolved from the same place when you exaggerate its pronunciation. And EVERYONE uses "duh."
Ultimately, Obama's "Special Olympics" comment wasn't said in a malicious way and he was making fun of himself, so yes, the faux outrage is a bit much. I mean it wasn't as if he was flailing his arms about making fun of people afflicted with Parkinson's disease or anything.
Bill Burton:“The president made an off-hand remark making fun of his own bowling that was in no way intended to disparage the Special Olympics,” White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said. “He thinks the Special Olympics is a wonderful program that gives an opportunity for people with disabilities from around the world.”
If we're honest with ourselves, in an unguarded moment, anyone could have said it.
Even before the taped program aired, Obama had already issued an apology.
On Air Force One, Obama called the chairman of the Special Olympics, Tim Shriver, and apologized.
"He expressed his disappointment and he apologized in a way that I think was very moving. He expressed that he did not intend to humiliate this population," Shriver said Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America."
...The White House said Friday Obama realizes his quip was a "thoughtless joke."
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the president believes that the Special Olympics are "a triumph of the human spirit."
Gibbs added that Obama "understands that they deserve a lot better than the thoughtless joke that he made last night."
According to CNN's Ali Velshi, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was responsible for adding the AIG bonus loophole.
...Geithner told CNN Thursday his department asked Sen. Chris Dodd to include a loophole in the stimulus bill that allowed bailed-out insurance giant American International Group to keep its bonuses.
If this is true, then Geithner should resign. Yes, we'll hear about it for the next week how yet another one of Obama's appointments was a screw up, but this one was over the top, especially in light of the fact that everyone was trying to throw Senator Chris Dodd under the bus for approving something administration officials at the Treasury Department requested. That's the Bush way of doing things (ie. George "Slam Dunk Medal of Freedom" Tenet) and it shouldn't be tolerated if we're to have any faith in what President Obama has to say in the future.
Jim Cramer spoke out against his Jon Stewart interview on the Today show.
I think it was a naive and misleading thing to attack the media. We weren’t behind this. CNBC, in particular, has been out front on this. … I think there are people who bear so much more responsibility [than the media] that it’s just wrong-headed: the politicians, the regulators, the SEC, the lenders, the investment banks. … It’s just a naive focus, it really is Meredith.
My question to Cramer is: why didn't you say any of this when you were on Stewart's show? By the way, during that interview, Jon Stewart did say that there were a few good journalists at CNBC and included David Faber, or don't you remember because of the drubbing you were in the midst of?
Cramer's comment of taking the "high road" when he said he would try to do better sticks in my craw when the following day on his show, he did this. So much for the high road OR actually trying to do better. Sorry, Jim. This defense was weak.
EW:Natasha Richardson, the versatile actress known for her nuanced performances on stage, television, and film, has died. She had suffered a traumatic brain injury in a skiing accident in Canada on Monday, March 16, and was later transported to New York, where she passed away at age 45. In a statement, Richardson's husband, Liam Neeson, and their family said, "Liam Neeson, his sons, and the entire family are shocked and devastated by the tragic death of their beloved Natasha. They are profoundly grateful for the support, love and prayers of everyone, and ask for privacy during this very difficult time."
Over the past few days, I've heard from multiple sources that Senator Chris Dodd fought to retain the retention bonuses for executives in the AIG contract. I thought that a bit strange and then I heard it again on Countdown with Keith Olbermann last night. But according to Marc Ambinder, Dodd is not to blame.
...Dodd is being blamed for OK-ing a proviso in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act guaranteeing previously sanctioned employment contracts. He faces intense political pressure because of his long-standing friendship with bankers and lenders, which has made him a key player in the negotiations between financial institutions and the government. In a statement yesterday, Dodd called on AIG executives to voluntarily refuse their bonuses. The truth is that the codicil was added in conference by mutual agreement of House and Senate Democrats and the White House.
Why would they agree to this? As Ambinder explains, then and now, they had no intention of nationalizing the banks, wanted to work with the banks and were afraid of the backlash if the perception was that the government could step in and abolish employee contracts at will.
...In conference -- Dodd was not a conferee -- the following clause was added to reconcile differences between the Senate and House bills:
iii) The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary.
Dodd, the chair of the banking committee, agreed to this language because most all of the stakeholders - including the administration - wanted it. But the original bill passed by the Senate contains Dodd's compensation limits without the carve out the exemption for bonuses. So there is no evidence that Dodd bowed to pressure from his contributors or that he was the author, the force of nature, behind it.Why the rush to blame Dodd? Apparently he has the lowest approval of any incumbent and his seat may be up for grabs. I would be very interested in knowing where the "blame Dodd" story originated, and wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it's a Republican red herring to try and gain a Senate seat in 2010. Good luck with that in the blue northeast.
There are plenty of places to look for fuck ups, but solely putting it on Dodd's shoulders isn't entirely fair.
There is a major push underway -- engineered by Obama's Treasury officials, enabled by a mindless media, and amplified by the right-wing press -- to blame Chris Dodd for the AIG bonus payments. That would be perfectly fine if it were true. But it's completely false, and the scheme to heap the blame on him for the AIG bonus payments is based on demonstrable falsehoods. (Continue reading using link above.)
This validates what I've been saying for ages. The way much of our national media report on Rush Limbaugh, you'd think he speaks for a significant proportion of Americans. Then you see a poll like this one from CBS News, and it turns out that the number who have really drunk the Limbaugh kool-aid --the true dead-enders--is not so huge.
We can take our country back from these people. I really believe that. There just are not as many of them as you might think.
Reuters: Senator Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, made the comments [regarding AIG executive bonuses] Monday in an interview with a radio station in his home state of Iowa.
"The first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them (is) if they'd follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I'm sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide," Grassley said.
"And in the case of the Japanese," he added, "they usually commit suicide before they make any apology."
Have you ever gone to a freak show? You pay your two bucks, the barker punches your stamp, and you get to walk around this smelly, dimly lit makeshift tent that will be gone is a few days and look at the "oddities." The freaks of society under one roof so you can get your gawk on.
Freak shows have been around forever. The Elephant Man, Chang & Eng the Siamese Twins, Jo-Jo the Dog-Faced Boy, and now we have the newest freak on the Fox block: Glenn Beck, the Cowardly Crying Doomsdayer.
Watch this clip and witness the horror. This freak of nature! GLENN BECK! The Cowardly, Crying Doomsdayer!
Now maybe I shouldn't have, but when I saw this freak I didn't gasp or cover my face in fear. I laughed. How sad is that? Am I the only one who laughed? I doubt it. I laughed because of the contradiction of his message. Beck goes on his new show at Fox and calls one of his segments the "War Room," creating a fictional hellish future as his viewers watch, mouth agape, for the purpose of stirring them into a Doomsday panic. He blames "your leaders and the special interests and the media," while at the same time promoting this "You Are Not Alone" special claiming that if "you pull away the curtain, there isn't anybody there. It's just a few people pushing the buttons." The same people that are pushing the buttons for Glenn Beck's show, perhaps?
Beck has started The 912 Project. I took a quick gander at the website and here was the first line I read: "The 9-12 Project is designed to bring us all back to the place we were on September 12, 2001." Because nothing says we should live in fear like the day after 9/11. I stopped reading before sacrificing any more brain cells.
This Nostra-dumb-ass is creating worst case scenarios on his show and freaking people out while simultaneously trying to get though his crying jag special by telling his audience they need to take back the world, remember "we surround them - you are not alone"... but don't forget to be afraid!
To be fair, Beck's explanation is that he is obviously trying to capture the feeling of the nation's citizens coming together as one after 9/11 (when Bush's approval ratings were through the roof). I would venture to say that he is recreating the feeling of fear on 9/12 due to his doomsday rhetoric and not this feeling of solidarity, but that's just me.
You should read his 9 Principles here. As far as his 12 Values, all you have to do is look at some of the commenters to see how quickly those values evaporate when dealing with someone who doesn't espouse their views.
While I believe Beck's current ratings are tantamount to staring at a freakish car accident with limbs and heads laying in the street, and that it's a hideous sight that you can't look away from, I also think that you wind up getting desensitized to the crazy and it'll get old quickly. After all, there's something weird going on when people on your own network are making fun of you, as shown by this Shepard Smith video.
So while Beck is the new and strange little oddity in the freak show that's drawing a crowd, soon it'll die down and people will say, "Oh, look. Beck's crying... again. Let's go take a look at the lady born with no arms that eats with her feet!" You've seen one self-immolation, you've seen 'em all.
ADDING... For added fun, take a look at Stephen Colbert's parody, The Doom Bunker.
Is it just me, or does John McCain's doublespeak give you whiplash too?
Here's the septuagenarian using that new fangled Twitter thingy.
Here's what he said during his campaign in favor of the bailout.
September 17, 2008: "I didn’t want to do that. And I don’t think anybody I know wanted to do that. But there are literally millions of people whose retirement, whose investment, whose insurance were at risk here. They were going to have their lives destroyed because of the greed and excess and corruption."
That's what we call in old 2004 parlance, a "flip-flop."
But wait! There's more! It looks like McCain was against it before he was for it before he was against it.
September 16, 2008: "No, I do not believe that the American taxpayer should be on the hook for AIG and I’m glad that the Secretary Paulson has apparently taken the same line."
I guess that's a "flip-flop-flip!" ...My neck hurts. I'm going to have to "follow" Twittter McCain and watch the hijinks ensue.
Another example of Fox's "fair and balanced" reporting. The wingnut reach is far and wide.
This afternoon, Fox News’s Martha MacCallum introduced a segment highlighting Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Christina Romer’s claim yesterday that the “fundamentals of the economy are sound.” “After weeks of economic doom and gloom, the Obama administration is now singing a slightly different tune,” MacCallum said.
She then played clips of Romer and other administration officials making seemingly positive comments about the current state of the economy. One of the clips was of Vice President Biden saying, “The fundamentals of the economy are strong!” After the segment, MacCallum said, “All right, well the mantra for the weekend is clear, looking at what was said over the course of the shows on Sunday.”
Was this another Biden gaffe? No. It was Fox News using footage from September of 2008 when Biden was quoting John McCain on the campaign trail. What a bunch of immoral, lying douchebags.
NY Times:Ron Silver, a versatile actor and independent-minded political activist who played Henry Kissinger, Alan Dershowitz and Angelo Dundee on the screen and supported Bill Clinton, Rudolph W. Giuliani and George W. Bush on the stump, died at home in Manhattan on Sunday. He was 62.
The cause was esophageal cancer, which was diagnosed two years ago, said his brother Mitchell.
...Mr. Silver was busy as a nonperformer as well. An activist most frequently allied with left-wing issues, he was president of Actors’ Equity, the stage actors union, for most of the 1990s, and he was a co-founder of the Creative Coalition, a group that advocates for First Amendment rights, public education and arts support. He campaigned for Bill Clinton for president.
“I’m an actor by calling but an activist by inclination,” he said in a 1994 interview.
Still, he had contrary impulses, and he paid attention to them. He was an advocate for President Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” defense plan, and he supported Mr. Giuliani’s campaign for mayor of New York in 1994. In 2004, he made headlines when he was a featured speaker at the Republican National Convention in Manhattan, supporting the nomination of President George W. Bush for a second term, largely because of his stance against Islamic terrorism. He supported Mr. Giuliani for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
[...]
...“Ron’s politics, as far as I know, were not shared by anyone he knew, except for the people he knew because of his politics,” Mitchell Silver said. He paused and added: “He told me that he did vote for Barack Obama in the end.”
Yes, Bush apologist Ari Fleischer was the early front runner and far and away outdid himself in the Douchebag arena this week.
Here are a few stink nuggets from just one interview:
"...I also think Barack Obama should say thank you every day that he inherited a world without Saddam Hussein in it. "
(Fleischer repeated this laughable line at least four times during the interview.) "I remind people that the tax cuts led to a record-breaking 55 months of economic growth and job creation. We‘ve never in this country had 55 straight months of job creation. We had that under President Bush before the bank failures of September."
(48 of those months were recovering the lost jobs of your administration's mild recession - the rest of those jobs have been lost with the current recession.)
"... the one thing people are going to remember the most is that [George W. Bush] kept us safe. We have not been attacked against since September 11."
Eric "The Squirrel" Cantor appeared on Meet The Press today to poo-poo Poresident Obama's budget while bringing up the fictional train from Disneyland to Las Vegas again, but he did say that the GOP was going to offer an alternative budget proposal.
MR. GREGORY: Are you going to vote for the president's budget?
REP. CANTOR: Listen, the budget process, as you know, David, is one that has just begun on Capitol Hill. There is a lot of, I think, reticence to embrace his budget on both sides of the aisle. This budget, frankly, doesn't have the focus that we need right now in this economy. The focus should be, job one, fixing this banking system and trying to get jobs created again.
MR. GREGORY: Right. But the, but the budget says there's $750 billion to help capitalize the banks. You, you have not offered a figure on what you think is necessary to do that, other than saying you got to do something to get private capital in.
REP. CANTOR: David, David, the Republicans will have a plan.
George Stephanopoulos repeatedly pressed McConnell for a comprehensive Republican alternative budget. Each time, McConnell simply attacked Obama’s plan. He said that he and his colleagues would be offering amendments to “reframe” what the Democrats have proposed, but don’t plan on offering a comprehensive plan:
McCONNELL: [W]e are going to offer a number of amendments to the Democratic proposal. […]
STEPHANOPOULOS: But shouldn’t you have a comprehensive approach that lays out the trade-offs? If you just have rifle-shot amendments, you don’t have to make all the trade-offs that you have to make in an overall budget.
McCONNELL: Well, we’re just sort of getting down in the weeds here about procedure. Through the amendment process, we would absolutely reformulate the Democratic plan. Whether you have a comprehensive approach or whether you offer an amendment is something a parliamentarian can debate.
So what's the plan? Come up with an alternative, comprehensive plan to show you really want to play ball, or weaken the Democratic plan with crap ass amendments? Enjoy the wilderness, boys.
Huff Po:Former White House spokesperson Dana Perino said on Sunday that the Bush administration, while presiding over the start of the current recession, nevertheless deserved some credit for the modest uptick that Wall Street experienced this past week. Appearing on CSPAN's Washington Journal, the last of Bush's press secretaries said it was "not a secret" that the current economic mess started under her boss's watch. But, she cautioned, the public had yet to realize the full extent to which the past president's policies "alleviat[ed] the downturn."
..."You were just speaking earlier about the possibility that since we had a little bit of a better week on Wall Street does that spell a turnaround?" Perino said. "Can all the credit go specifically to President Obama? Well, I would say no. We will just have to take a while to let all of this settle down and let the policies that our administration and the new administration are trying to put in place have a chance to work."
******************
...Cheneyagrees that Obama did indeed came into power amid very difficult economic circumstances.
But Cheney says he doesn't think the Bush administration can be blamed for creating the economic woes. Cheney says it's a global financial problem.
So is it an "Obama recession" or not? They can't claim that Obama's policies are sinking the economy if the Bush policies haven't been realized to their full extent.
Every time someone uses the phrase,"liberal media," I look for the nearest brick wall on which to pound my head against.
In anticipation for the Jon Stewart/Jim Cramer knock-down-drag-out, Cramer took to the airwaves of the morning shows in his defense to attempt to rehabilitate his image and rebut his main critic with a specific message: "A comedian’s attacking me. Wow. He runs a variety show." I remember him saying it at least twice. He appeared on the Today show, got Joe Scarborough to shill for him on Morning Joe, and even pounded dough with Martha Stewart.
After the bloodletting, Joe Scarborough was touting an exclusive interview with Cramer on Morning Joke™ using Twitter.
I even got up at an ungodly hour to watch. No Cramer. Then this.
So much for Jim Cramer taking it like a man. Did he no-show or was he cancelled? Maybe the latter.
..."MSNBC producers were asked not to incorporate the Jim Cramer/Jon Stewart interview into their shows today." In fact, the only time it came up on MSNBC was during the White House briefing, when a member of the press corps asked Press Secretary Robert Gibbs if Pres. Obama watched. Gibbs wasn't sure if the president had, but Gibbs did. "I enjoyed it thoroughly," the Press Secretary said.
Keith... Keith... Why have you forsaken us?
The biggest disappointment in all of this is that the "liberal media" (namely MSNBC according to its detractors) took its marching orders with the culmination of Keith Olbermann completely ignoring what was probably one of the best journalism pieces this short year. Not. A. Word. And the silence was deafening.
Now we all know what side KO's bread is buttered on, but I think this qualified as a pretty big news story and if Olbermann doesn't think he can mention it because of a conflict of interest with separate NBC network entities, then he actually did no better than Jim Cramer.
Luckily, there is still one person on the MSNBC line up that kept her integrity.
Yes, Rachel Maddow framed the feature of this "Dust Up!" story in regards to what millions were interested in, in comparison to other newsworthy stories... but she mentioned it. She didn't ignore it like the rest of the day of MSNBC programming, from Morning Joke™ to hours of inane coverage of that missing Halleigh girl to even more news of Anna Nicole Smith two years after her death. That's what they talked about. But something that happened to one of their own in the NBC family? Mum's the word.
Chris Matthews, who got his own drubbing in my opinion with the Ari Fleischer crapfest, ignored it. David Shuster? Did he mention it? Apparently not, since it seems to be the talk of the intertubes that except for Maddow, the Cramer story was ignored (please correct me if I'm wrong).
Let's not forget that this isn't some little side story about television personality rumbles. This was the true outing of the lack of financial oversight and regulations that have put our government in an economic crisis that we all fear, an admission from a former hedge fund manager as to how the inside game is played because the SEC doesn't understand it, as well as a complete deficiency of investigative journalism on the part of the financial "reporters" on financial news networks like CNBC and Fox Business Channel. If they have doubts about a certain company, do they seriously expect a CEO of said company to come on their show for an interview and be honest?
As for Jim Cramer, he was the only other NBC regular that actually mentioned "what happened yesterday" on his Friday broadcast, proving to all that it was going to be "business as usual" on his show, bell, whistles, red buttoned sound effects, plastic sledgehammers and all. So much for the promise of change, Mr. Cramer. So much for the promise of change.
The Dow Jones has rebounded 623 points in the last three days, a 9.5% gain. I'm waiting with bated breath for all the "Obama Recession" bastards to give him credit for having the foresight to throw money at the problem and stem the tide.
The Obama economic "surge" worked! Why can't they admit that? Say it. SAY IT!
ADDING... Of course, I'm kidding. My point is that one has nothing to do with the other. It's all speculation based on insider news and confidence.
It's just very interesting and obvious that while the markets are doing poorly, President Obama's face is plastered all over the DJIA ticker, but when the markets are rallying, rags like Andrea Mitchell are trying to say the White House is taking credit for it while the MSM remains mum. Oh, they'll tell you the Dow is up, but the very next line isn't, "Is President Obama doing too much?" That's only reserved when the numbers are in the red. And please show me a quote where the White House taking credit that isn't intended as a joke, Andrea. And while you're at it kick your husband, Alan Greenspan in the scrotum. That scumbag was part of the problem.
I watched the edited version on Comedy Central last night and thought Stewart said his piece and Cramer took it like a man. Watching the unedited (and in my opinion, much better) version, there was more of a dialogue that I wish they had time to air on the show. That being said, maybe it'll make Cramer rethink the hype, give a fairer assessment on his program and get rid of the "Booyah!" plastic sledgehammer.
I used to watch these CNBC shows and initially thought that they were working for the interest of the viewer. But the events of the past year, especially the last two months, the tone seemingly changed to a "Blame Obama" mentality (maybe I'm biased) when this crisis was years in the making and Obama had been in office for two months, culminating with the Santelli rant that has the appearance of having been planned far in advance, I have to wonder what dubious or perhaps nefarious factors are at work here.
Jon Stewart may work at Comedy Central, but his style and crackerajck team has been at the forefront of exposing hypocrisy without the need to pull punches like so many "journalists" who fear losing access.
My prediction is that CNBC will suffer reduced viewership, will need an intense overhaul and if not, possibly cease to exist - and as far as the Cramer show, if he doesn't get rid of his big, red buttons and plastic cows and shed his sound effects for some more nuanced, serious financial discussion, he'll be gone by the end of the season. But what do I know?
This is an excellent interview, but my favorite part (with a guilty smile on my face) is when Stewart refers to Joe Scarborough as "Doucheborough." Enjoy.
There's something to be said for John McCain railing against earmarks. And he has every right to complain about wasteful spending tacked on to a budget that would bring monies home to certain districts. After all, McCain had not attached a single earmark to the bill, whether as a solo project or in conjunction with other Senators.
Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh (D)“...At a time when so many American families are tightening their belts to make ends meet, Congress should be as equally committed to living within its means."
Senator Bayh had $1,118,000 worth of earmarks in the bill.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY): "The bill costs far too much for a government that should be watching every dime."
Senator McConnell had $51,186,000 worth of earmarks in the bill.
Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe (R): "Each and every time, whether a Republican or Democratic initiative, I have refused to go along with big government spending or big government solutions."
Senator Inhofe had $53,133,500 worth of earmarks in the bill.
Of the 35 Senators that voted against the bill, 28 of them had solo earmarks included in the bill. Of those 28 Senators, 27 were so-called "fiscally conservative" Republicans and only one was a Democrat.
Total: $234 million. This is only for solo earmarks. This doesn't include co-sponsored earmarks that account for about $7.7 billion in spending.
But here's the thing: earmarks aren't necessarily a bad thing. You need that bridge repaired in your district? Want to add speed bumps by the grade school? Does the park that has fallen into disrepair need an overhaul to detract undesirables from loitering and provide a much needed playground in the area? All those are worthwhile items and earmarks can provide federal funding for certain needs that can't be afforded by local government revenues.
So why flip out over the earmarks and call them pork and wasteful spending? Well, how else to pose as a fiscal conservative and have soundbites ready for your next campaign commercial? How else are you suppose to show your Republican outrage at the way Washington works, wag your finger at President Obama and accuse him of not keeping campaign promises?
Speaking of campaign promises, let's get back to Senator McCain. Unless you live in a cave, you've probably seen the 15 second loop of McCain on the Senate floor waving his freak arms and shouting, "So much for the promise of change, Mr. President. So much for the promise of change" and all too stiffly, as if reading stage direction, slamming the bill with his hand. Well, like I said, McCain can argue against earmarks because he hasn't signed on for any, even though he can let other politicians in his state do the dirty work to the tune of $54.6 million in earmarks for Arizona.
But let's not confuse who made what promise. It was Senator McCain, while running for President who said he'd "make famous" the procurers of earmarks while waving his magic Sharpie™.
That was your promise, Senator McCain, not President Obama's. Besides the fact that your outrage at the earmarks this year account for less than 2% of the total bill. Are you saying that we can balance the budget with a 2% cut? I think I'll leave the economics to the professionals instead of listening to Mr. The Fundamentals Of The Economy Are Still Strong.
President Obama promised transparent earmark reform and to scale back earmark spending to pre-1994 levels, when the Republican Party took over control of Congress. That year, Congress spent $7.8 billion on earmarks. The new $410 billion Omnibus bill? $7.7 billion in earmarks. Mission accomplished, if you will. Next year we plan to see the remainder of his promise to make all earmarks transparent and accessible.
USA Today:Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's teen daughter Bristol, whose pregnancy out of wedlock caused a minor brouhaha during the 2008 presidential election campaign, has broken up with the baby's father,People.comand Star magazine's websitereported Wednesday. Bristol Palin previously said she expected to marry Levi Johnston once they were finished with high school. Their baby son, Tripp, was born two months ago.
(In your best Rod Serling voice): Picture if you will, a man. Small. Bitter. Demented. A man so blinded by ideology he can no longer tell the difference between truth and fiction. Black is white. Up is down. Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The US hasn't been attacked since 9/11, and we have George W. Bush to thank for it. Barack Obama should say thank you every day that he inherited a world without Saddam Hussein in it. Don't bother with your remote, you won't be able to change the channel or the message. You have now entered the Twilight Zone.
Why did I do it? I was tired. I had gone out to dinner with my wife and a couple of friends last night and stayed out longer than I intended. After a restless sleep and having an early call, all I wanted to do was take a little nap after my first show. I crashed in the office but unfortunately had MSNBC's Hardball on in the background.
And then it happened. Matthews, for reasons I'll never understand even if it was explained to me, had former Bush White House Press Secretary and current Bush apologist and legacy builder Ari Fleischer on to speak about Barack Obama. Really, Chris? What the fuck? And Matthews had his hands full trying to dodge a barrage of bullshit like a shoe ducking Dubya.
How many egregious lies can you spot coming from this scumbag's cakehole in this interminably long clip?
Poor, little Chris. He really tried, but Ari is a seasoned prick, one who can spew the crap better than anyone. He can tell little Billy that Lassie ran away while wiping the blood and guts and fur off his car fender, and do it with a smile on his weasely face.
The Jim Cramer evisceration continues. And Joe Scarborough gets into the act. Joe Scarborough!
I believe Thrusday night at 11pm on Comedy Central is going to be a Must-See-TV night, as Stewart's guest is going to be... Jim Cramer! I would also suggest to The Scar that should he happen to criticize a show, perhaps he should watch it first.
I had the pleasure of going to Marc Maron's show, Scorching The Earth, at the Green Room in Greenwich Village on Sunday night. It's a work in progress or a workshop of his dealing with his divorce, always with the Maron dark humor twist. Very interesting for a Maron fan like myself who listened to him daily on the Air America's Morning Sedition during the station's inception. If you're in town, you should definitely catch this show.
Maron, along with Sam Seder, are now doing a live Internet show from 3pm-4pm daily called Break Room Live, actually taking place in the break room of the Air America studios. How do I know it's actually the studio? You can see Ron Kuby entering multiple times for coffee while his show is in commercial.
Anyway, here's a clip of the show and an idea from Maron for job creation that he thinks should be added to the stimulus package.
Stewart continued his rampage against CNBC, specifically Jim Cramer, who decided to write an article on how his advice was mischaracterized by The Daily Show. ...Bad move, Jim.
UPDATE (2:18pm): Cramer fights back with an appearance on The Today Show, claiming he stuck his neck out when he told everyone to sell by October 2008. Well fuck, Jim, by October '08 even I knew that! I didn't need a talking head financial guru slapping red buttons like a maniac to tell me the market was tanking when it had been happening for a year. He also refers to himself as "the little guy." Poor multi-millionaire Jim Cramer.
Maybe you should just go on The Daily Show and hash it out. I'd like to see that.
So not only is the push for the situation we're in being characterized as the "Obama Recession," now we have wingnuts like Mary Matalin claiming that the Reagan 1981 recession was worse and for that matter, so was the Bush 2001 recession.
MATALIN: I don’t want to say I’m panic-free... but I do have the perspective we’ve been through worse. Reagan had a worse recession, and arguably George W. Bush, I was there in that pre-9/11. We inherited a recession. We acted quickly, and the recession, in combination with 9/11, was shallow and short, and we went on to have 52 months of consecutive growth.I’m not doing talking points here.
Nice qualifier, huh? "I'm not doing talking points here." Except for the "we inherited a recession" part and the "52 months of consecutive job growth" part.
Well, Matalin must have not seen February's 651,000 job losses which officially puts us at a deeper loss than the '81-'82 recession. And do I need to remind anyone that we weren't in a 18 month nose dive when Bush took office, nor was 9/11 to blame for the mild (in comparison) recession Bush oversaw which started in March of 2001?
That brown line, which only shows losses through December 2007, is the current recession as opposed to the Bush recession shown by the orange line. In fact, this chart also shows that every other recession was deeper and recovered faster than that of Bush's two term clusterfuck.
Oh, to be a fly on the wall in the Mary Matalin/James Carville household.
I know this is a hard time for our pocketbooks, what with our economy in shambles, record job losses and dropping a ton in the stock market (if you've been listening to Jim Cramer on CNBC), but I wanted to bring attention to a worthy cause in which my good friend Kim is participating.
I've known Kim personally for about for six years now and we have worked on a couple of shows together. My wife and I were lucky enough to have her attend our destination wedding. In the time that I've known her, Kim has expanded her horizons to include marathon running, which in my mind I always think I'd like to attempt just for the feeling of some incredible accomplishment... but if I wait long enough, the feeling passes and I belly up to the bar for another Guinness.
Now Kim is pushing the envelope even further for a good cause. My good friend has taken on the task of participating in a triathlon. Yeah! That's what I said! There's nothing better than running a 26 mile marathon... expect preceding it with a 2.4 mile swim and a 112 mile bike ride.
The last minute of Morning Joke™ on a lovely Monday morning:
Joe Scarborough: What did you learn today , Mika?
Mika Brzezinski: I think I learned we're all being really impatient, REALLY impatient with this economic crisis and we need to give it 6 to 9 months. I do. We're throwing around a lot of hysterical words here. So simmer down.
JS: Well, well so we give Washington 6 to 9 more months to spend a trillion dollars a day?...
MB: They've already spent it.
Mark Halperin: Throw away your stopwatch and get a calendar.
JS: ...The Chinese are going to be moving tanks into Times Square in a week...
Pat Buchanan: My portfolio won't take it.
JS: Can the Dow actually go down into negative territory, Mika, if we're gonna wait six more months?
Don McLeroy, chairman of the State Board of Education and point man in the fight over Texas' science curriculum... is convinced that evolution taught uncritically undermines faith, [and] knows that it will take a different kind of argument to win the debate about what should be taught in science classes in Texas public schools.
...[The avowed creationist] is among board members who want the standards to require a more critical approach to the teaching of evolution. It's a theory that McLeroy, 62, believes lacks the empirical data required to be taught without discussion of its particular insufficiencies.
I suggest to Mr. McLeroy that as soon as he collects an equal amount of "empirical data" for creationism or intelligent design (or whatever you're calling it this week) as has been collected for evolution, then he can make his case.
I attended my first high school reunion last evening. It's been 25 years since graduating from an all male Catholic high school... I think I'm still recovering. Not from the reunion, from the high school.
I kid. I had a great time seeing old friends, some of whom I've kept in touch with over the years and some who I haven't seen since walking out of the front doors. Some of us traded business cards in an attempt to really keep in touch this time. One friend came across my blog though my Facebook page and said he reads it daily, and although he doesn't agree with everything I say, if he agrees with any of it, he gets a kick out it and encouraged me to keep writing. Steve, if you're reading this, please leave a comment once in a while. That's the whole point of these blogs - to encourage debate.
Anyway, a fun time was had by all as we reminisced about the good ol' days of high school, traded stories (some true, some legend), rekindled lost friendships and forged new ones.
These past couple of weeks have seen the mainstream media, particularly MSNBC and CNBC trying to correlate the Dow Jones dive to the time President Obama has been in office. But as we all know, the DJIA has been in a tailspin since it's highpoint in September 2007. On Friday, Morning Joe used a graph showing the Dow's collapse... since Election Day, a full 14 months since the start of the downfall and 2½ months before Inauguration Day.
I decided to use Twitter in an attempt to contact Joe Scarborough directly to voice my concern regarding their more than misleading graph. And to his credit, Scarborough actually responded.
broadwaycarl@JoeNBC Watching your show et al showing the DOW tanking since Obama took office. Do yourself a favor and take a look at a graph since 9/07 9:41 AM Mar 6th from web
broadwaycarl@JoeNBC The market has been in a nose dive for 18 months. Are you expecting SuperObama to stop it in six weeks or are you just blaming him? 9:43 AM Mar 6th from web
JoeNBC@broadwaycarl We will tell the graphics dept that if they run the chart again, to either do it since 9/08 or 1/09. That seems fair. [5:30 PM Mar 6th] from web in reply to broadwaycarl
Thanks for responding, Joe, but does that really that seem fair? I specified September of 2007 because it was the height of the DJIA and 16½ months before President Obama took office. September 2008 may be a bit better even though it's hiding the 14000 DJIA peak during Bush's term, but the idea of using January 2009 as a possible benchmark is completely useless.
From September 2007 to January 20th, 2009, the DJIA lost about 6000 points. Since January 21st, it's lost approximately 1350 points, but the talk on the news and cable chatter would have you believe that the nascent Obama administration is to blame for years of deregulation, unbalanced trade agreements, trillion dollar tax cuts in time of war and aggressive day traders influencing the market for a quick buck in the short term regardless of the instability it causes.
Unfortunately, that's the game: manufacturing misleading charts, graphs and juggling the numbers to make it appear as if President Obama's six weeks in office has ruined the economy.
ADDING... Suffice it to say, if President Obama had done nothing to this point and let the banks that "are too big to fail" actually fail, I think you'd be hearing about a newly elected President who's like a deer in the headlights letting the country collapse financially and not doing anything about it because of his "inexperience."
ShareThis