Wednesday, December 30

Republicans Love The Torture; Hate American Values

David Shuster discusses Obama and his response to the Christmas Bomber with Republican Congressman and Former FBI Agent Mike Rogers.



Rogers: Are you saying want to extend the Constitution to Foreigners?

Shuster: What about upholding the Constitution?


As it turns out the Supreme Court has already settled this question w/Hamdan v Rumsfeld - the 14th Amendment Requires Equal Protection all "Persons" not just "Citizens". They still have Habeaus Protection under the Courts (even though Bush and Congress attempted to strip if from them) and Bush's first set of Military Commissions were found completely illegal.

What's amazing about this is that this FBI Agent doesn't trust the FBI to be able to get the job done. Shuster points out that none of the suspects who have been tried via Civilian Courts have been able to "Get Away With it" (and he should hsve slso mentioned that the Military Commissions have FAILED many times, particular in the case where charges were dropped against one of the Cole Bombers because he had been Tortured).

“We tortured [Mohammed al-]Qahtani,” said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. “His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that’s why I did not refer the case” for prosecution. [...]


The Military Commission Process is completely tainted, and should be avoided unless there literally is no other choice.

But let's be realistic here, people like Cheney, Rove and Rogers here are concerned with whether the susepct is brought to Justice - they're arguing for Jack Bauer Justice where this person could be interrogated for information with no-holds-barred. Particularly not Miranda or that peska annoying Constitution in the way.

It doesn't matter that other FBI Agents, ones who've actually gone undercover inside al Qeada and done successful interrogations deny that any abrogation of the Constitution or Miranda is necessary:

It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

We discovered, for example, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Abu Zubaydah also told us about Jose Padilla, the so-called dirty bomber. This experience fit what I had found throughout my counterterrorism career: traditional interrogation techniques are successful in identifying operatives, uncovering plots and saving lives.

There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics.


Yet these Wingnuts are still in love with techniques that have Never been shown to generate accurate information.


The Supreme Court has already settled this w/Hamdan v Rumsfeld - the 14th Amendment Requires Equal Protection all "Persons" not just "Citizens"

Sad to say, this is how they think Terrorism Should be Handled:



Vyan

Why do Republicans Hate the Constitution?

Here on Hardball you have Ron Christie beating the Republican Drum that the problem with Obama is that he's trying to Use the Constitution to fight Terrorism?



This just aired today and trascript is not up yet - but please watch to see how Joan Walsh put this little Golem wannabe in his place.

Cheney:

As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.


Yeah, That would be just like the Lawyer and Trial the Bush Administration gave to Richard Reid the last person to use PETN to try and blow up an American Plane? Or how about Jose Padilla? Or how about the other 200 plus terrorism suspects who're were succesfully tried and convicted - yes, even during the Bush Administration?

Meanwhile it seems that the "Masterminds" behind the Underwear-Bomb Plot were released form Gitmo by Bush against the advice of the Military that they represented a continued threat?

Brian Ross of ABC News reports that two of the four men behind the plot to blow up a U.S. airliner on Christmas Day were actually prisoners of the United States and that, under the leadership of President George W. Bush, were released into a Saudi art rehabilitation program.

According to Defense Department records, Muhamad Attik al-Harbi (now known as Muhamad al-Awfi) and Said Ali Shari were released from detention at Guantanamo Bay in 2007 despite allegations of material support for military operations in Afghanistan. Naturally, they were never tried on those charges and al-Awfi reportedly was refused access to his own passport to refute allegations made against him. Shari was reportedly killed in an airstrike on Christmas Eve, and is suspected in the murder of 6 Christian missionaries in Yemen.

Both the families of al-Awfi and Shari attribute their radicalization to their years in detention at Guantanamo Bay.


Let's repeat this point - these guys were NOT terrorist before they were detained at Gitmo as quite a bit of evidence has shown many of those held there are completely innocent, but the experience of being unlawfully detained (and very likely mistreated) was itself the Spark that radicalized these men and led to the Christmas attack.

And Cheney thinks this is what we need to keep doing?

Also Abdul Muttalab received his Visa and Passport and traveled to the U.S. TWICE under the Bush/Cheney Administration.

Sadly this lunacy is not just coming from Cheney, there's also Gingrinch.

In the Obama Administration, protecting the rights of terrorists has been more important than protecting the lives of Americans. That must now change decisively. It is time to know more about would-be terrorists, to profile for terrorists and to actively discriminate based on suspicious terrorist information.


And there's Karl (Unsanctified Marriage Quitter) Rove.



CARLSON: This President was not notified until three hours after this incident became known. Is that a long time? It seems like a long time.

ROVE: Look, they woke him up immediately to tell him he won the Nobel Prize but couldn’t bother to interrupt his vacation for three hours to tell him a terrorist tried to bring down a plane on Christmas Day. And the President waits 72 hours before we hear from him, and it’s over 72 hours from the time of the incident to the time that the President spoke today, and then the President said some things that are simply not true.


President Bush didn't respond to the Richard Reid Shoe Bomber attack until 6 days later, and only because he was asked about it by a reporter at the end of a press conference - he never made Any kind of formal statement on it.

This bull is what we get from the people behind the President who didn't come off his vacation when he received the August 6th PDB that said "Al Qaeda Determined to Attack the U.S."

They got some nerve.

Eric Massa on Ed Responds to Cheney and Christie.



Massa: I'm sick and tired of the former Vice President taking shots at this administration for the creation of problems he was largely responsible for. It's like he has Political Tourettes!


Again despite what Matthew's claims Massa isn't the only one pushing back on this hard - The White House has Slammed Back.

To put it simply: this President is not interested in bellicose rhetoric, he is focused on action. Seven years of bellicose rhetoric failed to reduce the threat from al Qaeda and succeeded in dividing this country. And it seems strangely off-key now, at a time when our country is under attack, for the architect of those policies to be attacking the President.


Bellicose Attack is all the have, particularly when it's Republican Senator Jim Demint who is currently blocking the confirmation of the new TSA Head. It's been Republicans in Congress who've blocked funding and deployment for bomb sniffing equipment and full body scanners - yet they think they have credibility on "Fighting Terror"?

What's their solution : Call Jack Bauer?

The repeated whine coming from all of these Neo-cons is that Foreign Fighters shouldn't be subject to the protections of the Constitution - because if they get "Miranda Rights" and the ability to "Remain Silent" to cross examine witness and present evidence in their defense - it's BAD FOR AMERICA?

Really?

When people like Cheney and Gingrich and even Rove were sworn in to their government jobs they didn't swear to protect the American people, they didn't swear to protect American buildings, they didn't swear to protect Aircraft - THEY SWORE TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION.

Yet repeatedly the first thing they want to jettison in the face of each and every threat - no matter how incompetently executed - is run screaming from the Constitution at the highest speed possible.

And here's an example of Alan Colmes handing a serious Smack-Down to Wingnut Talking Points on Terrorism. Nice Job Alan.



Tantaros: But the point now is that we cannot discount this, we cannot use terms like 'manmade disaster' and go after -- it seems like this administration is more interested in going after Republicans, and going after the previous administration, than going after our real enemies. When you say, 'Don't blame Barack Obama' --

Colmes: That is an outrageous smear, an outrageous smear against an administration that's trying to do the right thing, that cares about this country. The implication that this administration or Democrats don't love America, don't want to protect America, don't want to protect the American people -- that's an outrageous smear against Democrats.

Tantaros: Alan, I don't blame just Barack Obama, like you said, Alan. I blame you, I blame Nancy Pelosi, and I blame the left and the liberals who are trying to weaken our country.


"Weaken the Country?" by having the country not just TALK TOUGH but actually Be Tough enough to live up to it's ideals and values instead of cowering in fear?

Republicans and Republicans ONLY want to pretend this is a debatable point, but it's not - not since the Hamdan v Rumsfeld decision which determined that even "Enemy Combatants" were indeed protected by the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions.

The Supreme Court announced its decision on 29 June 2006. The Court reversed the ruling of the Court of Appeals, holding that President George W. Bush did not have authority to set up the war crimes tribunals and finding the special military commissions illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva Conventions.


I think that tells everything we really need to know about these Patriotic Pimps.

Vyan

Tuesday, December 29

Specter Lets the Big Black Obstruction Cat Out of the Bag

All of us who've been paying attention have known this for some time, but to have it so openly confirmed is a rare and special moment - Here's Senator Specter Blowing the Whistle on the Republicans Not-So-Secret Plot to use Obstructionism to retake the White House in 2012.



Via TPM.

During his appearance yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) appeared to give out some inside dirt from his days as a Republican -- alleging that the GOP plotted early to stop any bipartisan cooperation with President Obama, and to instead look towards the 2012 election.

"I'd like to pick up on what Sen. DeMint says about the process. I think the process was very bad. But the process was really caused, in large measure, by the refusal of the Republicans to deal in any way," said Specter.

"Sen. DeMint is the author of the famous statement that this is going to be President Obama's 'Waterloo,' that this ought to be used to break the president," said Specter, referring to the political battle over health care. "So that before the ink was dry on the oath of office -- and I know this, because I was in the caucus -- the Republicans were already plotting ways to beat President Obama in 2012."

It's not often that a Senator will divulge private conversations from within the party caucuses. In Specter's case, he appears to be dishing out information from his former party caucus, declaring that they decided early on to focus on opposing Obama politically, and they now complain about a lack of bipartisanship that they themselves caused.

They told exactly what they were doing right up front...


The sad reality that we have to face is that this strategy has absolutely worked, it has sparked a wave of Democratic Fraticide we haven't seen the likes of since the Clinton/Obama Fued of the Primaries which some thought would fracture the party permanently.

The other day I watched near battle royale going on between Katrina Vanden Huevel of the nation and Jane Hamsher of Firedog Lake. It wasn't pretty:



JaneHamsher Well @thenation has come a long way. Opposing the Senate health care bill makes you Ralph Nader says @KatrinaNation

JaneHamsher So @KatrinaNation, you believe it's "Naderite" & "hurts progressive agenda" to say Obama is responsible for #hcr bill, and we should stop?

KatrinaNation @janehamsher Jane, Listen--I do respect your views & your right to criticize Obama/my retweeting that post did not mean I agree w/ it all!

JameHamsher RT @KatrinaNation Respect your views / how is that when you RT post telling me to stop criticizing Obama on #hcr? http://is.gd/5Dz08

JaneHamsher Point of the post is I'm "hurting progressive agenda" by criticizing Obama & should stop, not so "big tent" @KatrinaVandenheuvel @thenation

KatrinaNation @janehamsher Hope you'll contribute your view to Nation forum/ Obama @ One. If I didn't respect your right to criticize why seek your input? 8:44 PM Dec 27th from web in reply to janehamshe

KatrinaNation I hope progressive community in 2010 finds ways to disagree that don't divide us --as we work to mobilize, push power & build better future. 8:46 PM Dec 27th from web

JaneHamsher Criticizing the President on Health Care is “Naderite” and “Hurts the Progressive Agenda”: Ka... http://bit.ly/5BdUWB #publicoption

JaneHamsher If @thenation is shushing the President's critics on #hcr I hope everyone is relishing it @schwanderer, that's news.

KatrinaNation Jane-goodnight & let me try again. Point of MY posts: I do believe in big tent & your right to criticize O/Thanks for caring. 8:52 PM Dec 27th from web


This is how progressives are talking to each other - largely because Republicans have strategically abandoned the field and given all the power to people like Lieberman, Landrieu and Nelson.

These are the people on the other side of the argument:



These people can't be reasoned with. They can not be argued into a better position. Reason has completely LEFT THE BUILDING in their house.

Sspecially with Demint, even though he's recently denied it he did indeed say Republicans need to make Healthcare Obama's "Waterloo..."



That is their true face - not this:



Jim Demint is a member of The Family as well as being the One Lone Senator whose been holding up the new head of the TSA from Confirmation. Because of Demint the agency has no leader, yet even after the failed Northwest Airlines Bombing attempt Jimmy contends he's doing the right thing because he oppose "Collective Bargaining" that would delay security improvements.

Instead, the post remains vacant because Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has held up President Obama’s nominee in an effort to prevent TSA workers from joining a labor union. DeMint, in a statement, said Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s alleged attempted attack in Detroit “is a perfect example of why the Obama administration should not unionize the TSA.”


Unions are more scary than terrorists? Really?

Demint was also among the 30 Republicans who Voted against the Franken Anti-Rape Amendment doing so on the grounds that it would threaten Binding Arbitration.

Ok, so a deals a deal when someones been Raped - but when it comes to benefits for TSA Workers the last thing we want is for them to have an extra 15 mins for a coffee break.

He also opposed the New Hate Crimes Bill... because y'know a "Hate Crime" isn't really a Crime is it?



A Hate Crime is a not just a single Crime - it's an act of intimidation and TERRORISM. It's TWO Crimes, therefore it should be addressed as such.

These guys are willing to take down the President, to allow the Nation to be unprotected and attacked by Terrorists, to allow our Soldiers and Citizens to be victimized by Contractors, to allow people of color or of an unpopular religion, or sexual orientation to be terrorized and harrassed without protection?

They. Don't. Care. All they want is to regain Power at ANY COST.

We Progressives may disagree with each other, we might vigorously fight each other over various points within specific legislation - but the one thing we can't do - is let these FracKing NutBalls Back into Power again.

Vyan

Sunday, December 20

Howard Dean Didn't just say "Kill The Bill" - He said use Reconcilliation

What he really said was this:

“This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate. Honestly the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill, go back to the House, start the reconciliation process, where you only need 51 votes and it would be a much simpler bill.”




I know that people are heavily invested in the public option and that daring to point out that we might not actually NEED it is dangerous, particularly on DKOS - but it has to be said.

Now, I've agreed with Dean on most of his comments - but his suggestion here is really problematic. The things he'd like to get via Reconciliation such as a Public Option or Medicare-Buy In You Can't Get through Reconciliation.

You can't ban Pre-Existing Conditions with Reconciliation.

You can't set a life-time limit of out-of-pocket costs with Reconciliation.

You can't ban Coverage Rescission and Unreasonable Claim Denials with Reconciliation.

You can't set the Medical Loss Ratio to 90% (Requiring 9/10 of every dollar be spent on actual care - a point that Dean gets wrong in his Countdown Comments)

You can't get the opening of the Office of Personal option to allow private individuals to immediately join a Federal Employee-like plan and gain major buying power via the Economies of Scale.

YOU CAN'T GET THE EXCHANGE via Reconciliation and without the Exchange, you don't get the Public Option either.

This is why you get *THIS* particular reaction from Senator Rockefeller to Dean's Comments.



Rockefeller: I want to get (Health Care) passed, that's all I care about.

Mitchell: How does it hurt to have the former Democratic Chair saying, who is a Doctor, "This is worth doing something - doing nothing is better"


Even though Dean Didn't actually SAY THAT!

Mitchell: What else is in this bill that makes it worth passing?

Rockefeller: There are several things that happen immediately such as Medical Loss Ratio - which is a fancy way of saying that Insurance Companies have to spend 85-90% of their revenue on Health Care - that's huge.

14.1 Million Children will continue to get coverage who wouldn't otherwise.

We close half the (Medical Prescription) Donut Hole that affects seniors.

I wanted the Medicare-Buy In, but it was shot down - so what do I do take my football home and sulk? You never get everything you want, you keep improving the bill - next year or the year after that.


This is the reason why the White House is more pissed at Dean than Lieberman - because having the Public Option or even the Medicare Buy-in isn't as valuable as having all the above.

This is what the CBO said about the Senate Bill Last Month even without either the Public Option or Medicare-Buy In.

The report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office was released hours before the Senate began debate on the package, which would spend $848 billion over the next decade to extend coverage to more than 30 million additional people. The CBO said the legislation would lead to higher average premiums in the relatively small and troubled individual market, where the self-employed and others buy coverage directly from insurers. But that extra cost would buy better coverage, the CBO said, and hefty federal subsidies would drive down payments by nearly 60 percent on average for low- and middle-income families.

"This report alleviates a major concern that has been raised -- that insurance costs will go up across the board as a result of this legislation," Bayh said in a statement. "This study indicates that for most Americans, the bill will have a modestly positive impact on their premium costs. For the remainder, more will see their costs go down than up."


Dean consistently argues that without a public choice prices will continue to rise, but the CBO report refutes this. With 30 Million more customers the average cost will be spread wider and risk shared across a larger pool while demand stays largely the same (shifting from Emergency Rooms to Primary Care) you gain the advantage of catching disease an sickness earlier rather than later. In addition the 90% Med/Loss requirement will keep the Insurance Companies from charging their clients for spending on Lobbying, Advertising and coming up with more and more creative ways to deny coverage and claims.

Care will be Improved, people's lives will be saved while Overall Costs will go down, the Deficit will be reduced by $130 Billion in the first decade and $600 Billion in the second decade - 30 Million more people will be covered.

Yes, damnit, it could be better - MUCH - but if we don't pass anything, if we take NOTHING as an answer or pass something MUCH, MUCH WEAKER via Reconcilliation we probably won't get the chance to pass a better bill next year because the Republicans will take this as a VICTORY (The NRSC is already triumphantly re-tweeting Dean's comments) and use it to either take back control of the House and Senate or seriously whittle away at our current majorities.

I believe, despite the thunderclap going headlong for Public Plan or BUST - that what they current have is worth passing and worth Building Upon with further gradual improvements over time. As I said back in August The most important thing: is getting the Exchanges Up and Running - because that is where the power begins to be shifted from the Insurance Companies running around like Bandits in the Wild West to government oversight and management that protects patients. That's where the rubber first starts to meet the road where people can shop across many different plans and options and gain major bang for their buck by joining their purchasing power with tens of millions of other Americans.

Here again is what Joe Klein said back in August on this.


Klein: There's a 80-90% Chance that we'll have Insurance Reform this year, which will ban Pre-existing conditions, and you'll have Health Care Exchanges - which will lower the prices for small business and individuals.

Klein: The Public Option is peripheral to the really important stuff here.

Ed: It's not.

Klein: I've been covering this 20 years, you can have Universal Coverage without a Public Option. What does the Public Option do? It's give bargaining power to the public against the insurance companies - that is precisely what the Health Exchange Does!


Here's another thing, how many thousands of Americans who don't currently have health care or are under-insured are going to suffer and die while we go back to the drawing board or try to cram through a weak narrow bill that STILL won't really have what we want through Reconciliation?

Every year, EVERY SINGLE YEAR, more Americans Die for Lack of Health Care that we lost at 9/11 and during the entire Iraq War -- how much more of that can we stand?

IMO The Time IS NOW.

So, Let the flames fly!

Vyan

Update: Dean V Landrieu on Hardball.



Allow the charging or 300% more for older persons is something that can be fixed. He's right about Insurances agencies being less efficent than Medicare, but the Med Loss Limit at 90% mandates them to get a lot closer - so they won't be able to grab 30% of your premium and spend it on things beyond health care.

I really don't think you can create Medicare-For-All through Reconcilliation, the 767 Page Bernie Sanders Bill that Republicans were causing a Filibuster with today - WAS Medicare for All. It takes more than just modifying the "Fine print". Bush pushed through his tax cuts with Reconcilliation, which actually *is* a budget issue and also got funding for war which was already authorized. These weren't "New Programs" or changes to existing Law, it was all about funding.

Dean doesn't want to "eliminate" the Private Market - he wants competition with it, Landrieu wrong there.

However Landrieu is technically correct that the President promised that they would create a program like the Federal Employee Benefit System - but that's the Exchange - not the Public Option or Medicare expansion. Federal Employees don't *have* a Public Option right now, and yes there is a Non-Profit Option in the Current Senate Bill.

Under the compromise developed by a group of conservative and liberal Democrats, the Senate legislation would no longer include a new government-run insurance program, or "public option," for Americans who do not get coverage through their employers.

Instead, the government would essentially contract with a nonprofit insurer to provide a nationwide plan that would serve as the public option, according to officials briefed on the discussions.


This was part of the same deal thought brought in the Medicare-55-Buy-IN, which was later dropped due to Lieberman - but this portion has Stayed IN. It's better than the Co-ops, but less difficult and time-consuming than rebuilding and entire new program from scratch. If the issue is primarily having an additional choice, that's a choice.

Vyan

Monday, December 14

ACORN and Color of Change's Epic WINS!

Technically this is old news, but it's good news so I'm sticking with it...

Via CrooksandLiars.

A Brooklyn judge Friday delayed enforcement of a new federal law that cut off funding to the controversial community organization ACORN.

Judge Nina Gershon said the government violated ACORN's right to due process before enacting a law that threatened to financially destroy the organization.

"The question here is only whether the Constitution allows Congress to declare that a single, named organization is barred from all federal funding in the absence of a trial," Gershon wrote in a 21-page decision.

She said ACORN had proved it would suffer "irreparable harm" if the money was cut off.

ACORN lawyers expect the feds to open the purse strings soon. The Justice Department said the decision is under review.


PDF of Ruling.

As was pointed out by Rep. Alan Grayson, the judge found that Congresses Hysterical Action against ACORN was in fact a Unconstitutional Bill Of Attainder - since the act targeted a single individual or agency without benefit of a trial.

Here Grayson Grills Rep. Paul Broun on the subject.



GRAYSON: I’d like to ask the gentleman from Georgia a few questions, and I’ll yield to him for the purpose of having answers to these questions. Does the gentleman from Georgia know what a bill of Attainder is?

BROUN: A bill of, the answer’s yes, in fact it’s been very explicitly described by the court’s.

GRAYSON: What is it?

BROUN: [long pause. Scrambling through papers.] The courts have applied a two pronged test. Number one, whether specific individuals or entities are affected by the staute, Number two, when the legislation affects a “punishment,” on those individuals, it serves no legitamate regulatory purpose.

GRAYSON: What, um, does the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?

BROUN: Oh, I suggest that this is not a Bill of Attainder. It’s, um, certainly does focus on a specific entity, but it does not inflict punishment by any means. In fact...

GRAYSON: Will the gentleman from Georgia explain what the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?

ANOTHER CONGRESSMAN: Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a second? The gentleman from Florida?

GRAYSON: No. I’d like an answer to my question. [...]

GRAYSON: The question is, will the gentleman from Georgia agree with me that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislature. Will the gentleman agree to that?

BROUN: No, sir, I will not, and I ask counsel to help us with this. I think all this is determination of the court and I’d like to appeal to Mr. Sensenberner.


Speaking of Trials... an Independent Investigation recently found that ACORN committed No Crimes in the Video "Sting" which ignited the anti-ACORN firestorm which led to Congress misguided legislation.

"We did not find a pattern of intentional, illegal conduct by ACORN staff involved; in fact, no action, illegal or otherwise, was ever taken by any ACORN employee on behalf of the videographers," Harshbarger said in a statement. "Instead, the videos represent the byproduct of ACORN's longstanding management weaknesses, including a lack of training, a lack of procedures and a lack of onsite supervision."


Meanwhile the videographers themselves who apparently thought showing up at a predominantly Black organization as a Pimp and Prostitute was a Good Idea - and were subsequently thrown out of several ACORN Offices before they eventual got any incriminating footage - may still face illegal wiretap charges themselves.

Baltimore, MD – September 11, 2009 – We have received inquiries from citizens and the media asking whether the Baltimore City State’s Attorneys Office would initiate a criminal investigation for acts allegedly committed at ACORN offices located in Baltimore. The only information received in reference to this alleged criminal behavior was a YouTube video. Upon review by this office, the video appears to be incomplete. In addition, the audio portion could possibly have been obtained in violation of Maryland Law, Annotated Code of Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article §10-402, which requires two party consent.

If it is determined that the audio portion now being heard on YouTube was illegally obtained, it is also illegal under Maryland Law to willfully use or willfully disclose the content of said audio. The penalty for the unlawful interception, disclosure or use of it is a felony punishable up to 5 years.


Oops.

You mean going around taping people without their consent or knowledge is like - a Felony? I guess these guys just thought they were the "Little Citizen's NSA". Not.

Hey dude, sorry to harsh your mellow but even Ashton Kutcher knows you need to get everyone to sign a release form before they show up on Punk'D!

Here's Giles and Breitbart claiming that no ACORN Office "Rebuffed or Refused the help them"...



HANNITY: So, in other words, when you go to Baltimore and D.C. and New York and San Bernardino and San Diego, and this all happened, were there any cities you went to where you just didn't get any videotape not worthy to air?

GILES: We are airing it. It's pretty worthy. Everyone seems to be --

HANNITY: In other words, you didn't go into one office, and they said, "We're not going to help you do anything like that?"

GILES: No.

HANNITY: Not one? Every place you went, they helped you or were willing to help you, either -- not report you for an underaged prostitution ring --

BREITBART: Well --

HANNITY: -- evade taxes, as we've --

BREITBART: Right. The -- it is interesting. There's no place, as ACORN tried to state, that kicked them out based upon the premise that they were doing something nefarious.




O'Keefe: None of the facilities "Kicked Us out" - that's a Lie.



Except that they didn't get help everywhere they went...not hardly. Whose the Liar?



And that Police Report would be here:



Meanwhile Color of Change, the organization which successfully managed to get 80 advertisers to pull out of the Glenn Beck Show has manage to get a retraction for defamation carried out then by a Pro-Glenn Beck Website.



After ColorOfChange.org took on Glenn Beck for his race-baiting and fear-mongering, Beck's supporters fought back using lies, distortions, and more race-baiting to defend him. DefendGlenn.com was the worst, mounting a campaign to scare advertisers into staying on his show.

After we threatened them with a lawsuit, DefendGlenn.com has backpedalled. It should make clear to advertisers who have pulled their support that they've done the right thing

DefendGlenn.com, the website created and dedicated to supporting controversial Fox News personality Glenn Beck, today issued a public retraction of several erroneous statements it made regarding civil rights organization ColorOfChange.org. The site has posted the retraction on its home page - www.DefendGlenn.com - and, per an agreement, must keep it there for seven full weeks.



This is what happens when you seek to spread FEAR BASED ON LIES - eventually you get spanked, hard.

Hey, Fox News...ARE YOU LISTENING?



Vyan

Sunday, December 13

Arovosis Slams Palin Denier-Gate Op-ed as Junk Science



John Aravosis of AmericaBlog takes Palin's Washington Post Op-ed apart bit by bit, yet again making the point the "He-Said She-Said" Journalism isn't about finding the truth, it's about diluting the validity of the truth and facts by giving equal time to Lies!

The Palin Apologist arguing with Aravosis attempts repeatedly to say Palin is equivelent to Al Gore simply because Al Gore was Vice President while Sarah Palin LOST as Vice President, and then quit as Governor of Alaska. It is true that Alaska is the state currently most impacted by Climate Change, but also that Sarah Palin has learned practically ZERO from that experience.

What did Sarah Palin do about the shrinking permafrost and thawing frozen tundra in Alaska that is now spewing methane into the atmosphere?

Nothing.

What did she do in response to the EPA listing Polar Bears as an endangered species? She threatened to Sue to repeal the listing.

She and other Alaska elected officials fear a listing will cripple oil and gas development in prime polar bear habitat off the state's northern and northwestern coasts.

Palin argued there is not enough evidence to support a listing. Polar bears are well-managed and their population has dramatically increased over 30 years as a result of conservation, she said.

The announcement drew a strong response from the primary author of the listing petition.

"She's either grossly misinformed or intentionally misleading, and both are unbecoming," said Kassie Siegel of the Center for Biological Diversity. "Alaska deserves better."


Sarah argues that "Al Gore makes money from Climate Change" - when in fact he doesn't, he donates nearly every cent he's made including proceeds from his Book, his Oscar Winning Film and even his Nobel Prize Money - yet she herself used to be work on Alaska's Energy Commission - before she Quit - and her biggest claim to fame as Alaska's governor is putting through a deal to build a Natural Gas Pipeline across the state Canada, as if she didn't get tons of funds from Energy Lobbyists to make that happen.

Besides I thought getting Rich was a "Good" thing to Republicans? I guess not when the people getting rich try to do something worthwhile with their money like Gore or (The Dreaded) George Soros.

On top of that just last year Sarah Palin claimed that she believed that human activities DID contribute to Global Warming and Climate Change when she spoke with Charlie Gibson during the Presidential Campaign.

PALIN: I believe that man’s activities can certainly be contributing to the issue of global warming and climate change.



So which is the real Sarah?

All of this bogus debate is clearly played out in the Fox News Sunday example where classic Climate Denier Sen James Inhofe goes Mano-a-mano with Rep. Ed Markley:

From Think progress.

WALLACE: The fact is, just this week, the world meteorological organization said that this decade is the warmest on record, and that 2009 is the 5th warmest year on record. Does that mean nothing?

INHOFE: It means very little. Because that was based on the same flawed science — the IPCC science — that we have been looking at.

Fox’s presentation of a “debate” over global warming science is a classic example of the “false balance” that the traditional media often employs to discuss the issue. The media watchdog group, Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, observed that the journalistic norm of “balance” has given disproportionate attention to false perspectives: “By giving equal time to opposing views, the major mainstream newspapers significantly downplayed scientific understanding of the role humans play in global warming.”

The “debate” obscures the real impacts of global warming: Arctic sea ice is at historically low levels, Australia is burning, the northern United Kingdom is underwater, and the world’s glaciers are disappearing. And of course, it’s the hottest decade in history.

The argument that the hacked emails show that Climate Change is a "Hoax" has been completely and total Debunked by Everyone with a shred of credibility on the issue - including the AP who independently reviewed the emails and their content:

LONDON – E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.


In the past three weeks since the e-mails were posted, longtime opponents of mainstream climate science have repeatedly quoted excerpts of about a dozen e-mails. Republican congressmen and former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin have called for either independent investigations, a delay in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulation of greenhouse gases or outright boycotts of the Copenhagen international climate talks. They cited a "culture of corruption" that the e-mails appeared to show.

That is not what the AP found. There were signs of trying to present the data as convincingly as possible.

Fact is fact and Fantasy is Fantasy - some day the Wingnuts like Inhofe and Palin will learn the difference - (or stop pretending they don't know the different when their Corporate Sponsors stop paying them to Lie) - Maybe.

Vyan

Jack Black Dragged Off Stage at Spike Video Music Awards

DOWNLOADS: (7)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (100)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

December 12, 2009 TNT SPIKE TV

Saturday, December 12

Beck & O'Reilly As Pissed (At a Fictional Character!)

On a recent episode of a Fictional Show - namely Law & Order: Special Victims Unit one particular character, portrayed by John Laroquette, in response to the murder of several illegal immigrants made the following statement:

“Limbaugh, Beck, O’Reilly, all of ‘em, they are like a cancer spreading ignorance and hate...They’ve convinced folks that immigrants are the problem, not corporations that fail to pay a living wage or a broken health care system...”


This of course has Billo Completely LIVID.


Via YahooNews:

After playing the clip of the "defamatory and outrageous" scene, O'Reilly slammed Dick Wolf as a "coward" and a "liar" before playing a montage of clips demonstrating his past defenses of "poor people who only want a better life." O'Reilly went on to explain that his "beef" isn't with illegal immigrants themselves, but rather with the federal government for doing little to control immigration and the "violent aliens who wreak havoc once they get here." He concluded by chastising Wolf for "distorting and exploiting" the issue of illegal immigration.


More directly from Fox:

If you watch "The Factor" you know my beef is with the federal government not controlling illegal immigration and with violent aliens who wreak havoc once they get here.

Again, Dick Wolf, the executive producer of "Law & Order," is a despicable human being for distorting and exploiting this very complicated situation.

I mean, enough is enough with these network pinheads who shove propaganda down our throats under the guise of entertainment. Patriotic Americans can debate illegal immigration respectfully. No one on "The Factor" has been allowed to demonize any innocent human being, and it is partially because of this program that the border fence was finally put up so that there could be some kind of responsible regulation about who comes into America.

I can't tell you how angry I am that this "Law & Order" thing happened, and it's no accident it happened on NBC, which is propaganda central in the USA. It's also the lowest-rated network.


Ok, well that clears everything up doesn't it. O'Reilly didn't attack immigrants - he just attacks the Government that didn't do enough about Illigal Immigrants. Yeah. Ok.

If Government isn't doing it, doesn't that suggest that O'Reilly supports individual citizens taking things into their own hands ala The so-called "Minutemen"?

Anybody remember this knock-down drag out about between O'Reilly and Geraldo Rivera over a Drunk Driver/Illegal Immigrant Issue?




Geraldo: Don't obscure a tragedy to make a cheap political point.


Geraldo also pointed out that the drivers previous arrests and convictions were non-violent (being drunk in public twice, and one victimless DUI - in Chesapeake - and there was no evidence of "Moral Turpitude" in any of these cases, hence Ramos was not targeted for deportation) - he was able to make these statements with authority because he - unlike O'Reilly - is a lawyer and sometimes actually knows what he's talking about.

Also...

Geraldo: Illegal Immigrants commit crimes at a lower percentage than the general population

Billo: You want Anarchy!! You want Anarchy with Open Borders!



Meanwhiie Glenn Beck is having his own mini-meltdown over his own statements being thrown back at him via the TEEVEEE as well...


Beck: “where is the evidence for inciting any violence? Show it to me.”



Where's the Evidence? How 'bout the following which I most recently posted when Dana Perino claimed "Bush never had a Terrorist Attack"...


We've had this guy allegedly shoot and kill an OB/GYN in order to make a religous and political point about the "Santity of Life": (A Violent crime committed against someone that Bill O'Reilly personally Railed against FOR YEARS!)



Or this guy who walked into a Unitarian Church in Knoxville Tennesse and shot 4 people - killing 2 of them - because they were, in his opinion, too "Liberal"? (Based on recommendations he got from frequent Bill O'Reilly Guest - Bernie Goldberg)



From Adkisson's "Note":
"Know this if nothing else: This was a hate crime. I hate the damn left-wing liberals. There is a vast left-wing conspiracy in this country & these liberals are working together to attack every decent & honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state. Shame on them....


Also...

[Police] seized three books from Adkisson’s home, including “The O’Reilly Factor,” by television commentator Bill O’Reilly; “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder,” by radio personality Michael Savage; and “Let Freedom Ring,” by political pundit Sean Hannity


Or this guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum in Washington killing a security guard who was opening the door for him... (A guy who also thought "Obama is a KENYAN!" - where could he have heard that from?)



Or this guy who killed three Pittsburgh Police Officers either because he was frustrated with his girlfriend or "Obama Wants to Take Away My Guns" - or both.




Is it really that ridiculous that a story could be written linking the Loud and Inflammatory Rhetoric of people like Beck and O'Reilly with a murderous rampage?

No, It's ridiculous that it's taken this long for Hollywood to notice and create a MADE-UP story about it...

If these Conservatives really thought there was no link between inflammatory comments and actual violent events - why do they attack RAP MUSIC the way that the do - directly linking their words to action like the Killings at Virginia Tech?



This has been naturally going on for years particularly with the music of Ice T with his Rock band Bodycount when they released the Social-Commentary song "Cop Killer"?

Also another irony, the actor who John Larroqutte was talking to on Law and Order was Ice T playing his long-standing role on that show as a Cop!

Vyan

Update I want to address Beck's attempt to defend himself by pointing out that he was accused of inspiring the Murder of a Census Worker who in turn it was discovered had simply committed suicide. You could say this is simply the case of one poor desperate man who wanted to leave his family some insurance money - but you also have to look at How he choose to do that which was to create a scenario which seemed in his mind the most likely area where he - a Federal Employee - might be attacked and harmed. In the middle of appalachia, stripped naked with the word "FED" written on his chest.


Why wouldn't people take a close look at rabid anti-Government sentiment which is famed to brew strong in that area when you have Beck making statements like this at the time...



And This



And this too...



Or This...



With all that why might somebody find if believeable that anyone who works for the Government or President Obama think that there might people out there "gunning for them"?

Frankly, it's lot more plausible that the cockamamie story this chick came up with?



Isn't it?

Saturday, December 5

Sarah Palin: Going Birther!

Sarah - the Self-Absorbed Quitterific Serial Fact-Mangler - Palin In response to questions and issues which very briefly surrounded the birth of her own son Trig, has now decided that that experience (which she decries as totally unfair - and it WAS) now believes it gives her license to question the birth of the 44th President of the United States.

Douche-Nozzle Much?



I hate to tear everyone away from the latest Tiger Woods Ho-Swinging News, but this just in... Four-Time College Quitter, Ex-Mayor, Energy Commission Quitter, Governor Quitter, Book Signing Quitter and Turkey Trot Quitter Sarah Palin is a Nutbag (Enabler).

A Few Points as I listen to the Interview for the first time:

Palin blasts Obama for not being enthusiastic about going over and "Killing those Terrorists" and not having a "Steel Spine" like Reagan -- Y'mean before or after Beiruit!

Palin solution to the Economy Problems - Tax Cuts Period. (This besides the fact that nearly 60% of the Stimulus WAS Tax Cuts - "for the Job creators" - Oy vey!)

She also signs on with the Tea Parties in blasting the Bail Out - even though She Supported the Bail Out when Bush put it through... not to mention her signing on fully with the "Climate Change Conspiracy Theory" - just to completely round-out her full on craziness.

The key portions comes up about 8 mins in...

From Thinkprogress:

Palin: Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask... which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.


HEY SARAH it's not a "Legitimate Question" because the Birth Certificate is RIGHT HERE!



Now, Logically this should END THE MATTER - unfortunately like many Dimbulb conspiracies - It doesn't.

I've been over this in exhaustive detail before - so here's a quick refresher because when we don't walk people through it all, they claim we're HIDING something... so for those who question the above here's more. (I'm quoting ME, so I gave myself permission)

Showing the Folds.


Signature on the Back


The Raised Seal


Close Up of City of Birth


Unredacted Certification Number


Birth Announcement from Local Honolulu Paper filed by Obama's Grand Parents

Now, the funny thing about this, and the thing that keeps the Birthers coming back even when you do display all the above - as Matthews, Cenk and Fact Check do - is the fact this this document really isn't Obama's Birth Certificate.

Hey, stop throwing rocks... I'm serious.

No, I'm not supporting a Conspiracy Theory on Dkos - that would be a TOS violation, I'm just saying. as Yoda would - There is Another.

This document is Obama's "Certification of Live Birth", it is essentially the "Short Form" of his certificate and most states including Hawaii have another longer form which includes details such as Birth Weight, possibly even a footprint and such to help confirm the identity of the child. (Y'know the stuff Identity Theft is made of...)

Here's what Fact Check Says about it.

The document is a "certification of birth," also known as a short-form birth certificate. The long form is drawn up by the hospital and includes additional information such as birth weight and parents' hometowns. The short form is printed by the state and draws from a database with fewer details. The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate, but their short form has enough information to be acceptable to the State Department. We tried to ask the Hawaii DOH why they only offer the short form, among other questions, but they have not given a response.


What all these Birther as clamoring for - Is the Long Form, not this one.

They argue, that they've found examples of foreign citizens who've managed to forge the short form and therefore the ability to commit such a forgery automatically de-legitimizes the form supplied by Obama. It's sort of saying that simply because someone can counterfeit a $20 Bill, every other $20 is therefore invalid.

Yeah, Right - Ok....


Neo-Birthers like Lou Dobbs claim they don't question his citizenship but that they just want to see Obama's "Long Form" - and continue to question why he doesn't show it. Let me make this simple:

A) THE LONG FORM IS NOT THE OFFICIAL FORM: It is not certified and signed by the State and recognized as Official and binding by State Authorities or the Government. You can't get a Drivers License or a Passport with the Long Form - Yet, somehow Obama has both - hmmmm...

b) HAWAII DOESN'T OFFER COPIES OF THE LONG FORM: Go back and re-read what Fact Check Found - "The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate" - so essentially they're asking for something EVEN OBAMA CAN'T GET from the State of Hawaii. A Perfect Unprovable Conspiracy: Sort of like claiming an Evil Robot from the Future has been sent to Kill Sarah Connor - only it's not the Future Yet...

c) BUT SHOULD HE STILL HAVE HIS OWN ORIGINAL COPY?: Logic dictates that his Mother would have had that, and for those of you who are completely insensitive and need this explained to you - Obama Mother DIED When he was an adolescent and his father was already dead - He's an ORPHAN YOU DOPES - so it's probably lost. All he can do is request an official copy from that state - and That's Exactly What He Did.

Lastly I have few questions for the Birthers, since they like to ask them, maybe they can answer just a couple teeny, tiny questions:

    How exactly did a 17 year-old 9-month pregnant girl fly from Hawaii to Kenya, then fly back with a Newborn Baby Boy and NOBODY FRACKING NOTICED?

    What did she travel steerage?

    Who paid for this trip?

    Did he use a passport or just a kind word and a flirty wink to cross all those borders without leaving a trace?

    Is the Lock Ness Monster Real?

    How Many Spaceships are they hiding at Area 51?

    Why does Bigfoot's Skin always Sag around the Middle?

    Who Shot J.R.?

    How's OJ Gonna find the Real Killers from Prison?

    And finally - WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANYONE TRAVEL 15,000 MILES ROUND TRIP Pregnant?


The insanity of it all just gets worse and worse the more you think about it.

Here's what Media Matters Has to say about it:

Lying: President Obama's birthplace and nationality have been established beyond any credible doubt -- he was born in Hawaii, in 1961, and is and always has been an American citizen. It is not a "fair question" to suggest otherwise.

Hypocrisy: What little credibility her attacks on the media had were based largely on the poor treatment she received from isolated quarters of the blogosphere regarding the birth of her son. For her to continue to complain about that while simultaneously questioning the president's birth, and suggesting that she would be justified in doing so, is hypocritical and disgusting beyond anything I thought Palin capable of. And let's not forget that when Palin's family first became an issue in the press shortly after McCain tapped her, Obama came to her defense: "I think people's families are off-limits, and people's children are especially off-limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as governor or her potential performance as a vice president."

Political stupidity: If Palin does, indeed, have political ambitions, then she's doing everything she possibly can to scuttle them by embracing Birtherism. There's a reason that national-level elected Republicans don't (for the most part) wade into the Birther swamp -- because the issue is so radioactively crazy that it would be political suicide to do so. If news reports are to be believed, Lou Dobbs was dropped by CNN because he indulged his Birther curiosities. It was hardly the first crazy thing Dobbs did while at CNN, but it was that special kind of crazy that made CNN say "enough." In short, anyone who has the Birther stain is not going to be a success in the political mainstream


Yeah, what they said...

Vyan

Wednesday, December 2

Flip-Flop of Decade: McCain was FOR $1.3T in Medicare Cuts, before he was Against $400B in Savings!

As was noted on Keith Last Night Senator (and would've been President - if not for those darn meddling kids on Wall Street) John McCain has been railing heavily against the "unspecified cuts" proposed in the current Senate Health Care Bill.



Yes, we now have become completely unaware of the cuts we're previously fully aware of - especially the cuts proposed by Senator John McCain to the tune of $1.3 Trillion way - way back in - 2008!

John McCain Today - Pounding the Dead "Rationing" Horse:


Madame President, simply put, this motion to commit would be a requirement that we eliminate the half a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts that is envisioned by this bill. A half a trillion dollars in cuts that are unspecified as to how, and a half a trillion dollars in cuts that would directly impact the health care of citizens in this country. ... All of these are cuts in the obligations that we have assumed and are the rightful benefits that people have earned. ... I will eagerly look forward to hearing from the authors of this legislation as to how they can possibly achieve a half a trillion dollars in cuts without impacting existing Medicare programs negatively and eventually lead to rationing of health care in this country. That is what this motion is all about. This motion is to eliminate those unwarranted cuts.


John McCain Yesterday (From the October 6, 2008 Wall Street Journal)

John McCain would pay for his health plan with major reductions to Medicare and Medicaid, a top aide said, in a move that independent analysts estimate could result in cuts of $1.3 trillion over 10 years to the government programs.

The Republican presidential nominee has said little about the proposed cuts, but they are needed to keep his health-care plan "budget neutral," as he has promised. The McCain campaign hasn't given a specific figure for the cuts, but didn't dispute the analysts' estimate.

Mr. Holtz-Eakin said the Medicare and Medicaid changes would improve the programs and eliminate fraud, but he didn't detail where the cuts would come from. "It's about giving them the benefit package that has been promised to them by law at lower cost," he said.


McCain's proposed Medicare Cuts weren't intended as Savings to help maintain the solvency of the program, his were intended to pay for - wait for it- Tax Credits worth $2,500 per person or $5,000 per family to help them buy health insurance "on the open market". At the same time the McCain plan was to remove the Tax exemption which currently applies to all Employer Based Benefits Packages - so while McCain would've been handing Paul Half-A-Loaf in the back alley, he's also Mugging Peter around the Corner.

Nevermind the fact that Health Care Currently costs more than $6,000 on the open market for an individual and $12,000 for a family. Thanks for next to nothing Papa John - where'd you learn to balance a checkbook on the nose of your Wife's private Jet?

Let's also recall that during the 90's, the Gingrich Republican Congress also attempted to ramrod through massive Medicare Cuts - not just to the amounts being paid, but actual reductions in service - and that the only way then-President Clinton was able to stop them was to Shut the Entire Government Down - TWICE.

Via Thinkprogress:

In 1997, McCain (along with many Democrats) voted for a series of Medicare cuts as part of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. That act decreased Medicare spending by 12.7% over 10 years and instituted the kind of payment updates that the Senate bill is now recommending. In 1995, moreover, Republicans sought to cut 14% from projected Medicare spending over seven years and force millions of elderly recipients into managed health care programs or HMOs. As Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich admitted, “We don’t want to get rid of it in round one because we don’t think it’s politically smart,” he said. “But we believe that it’s going to wither on the vine because we think [seniors] are going to leave it voluntarily.


They absolutely tried to KILL Medicare, and now they claim to be it's "Savior"? Yeah, right - sell me another bridge why don'tcha this one's all rusty from all the piss you keep telling me is RAIN!

It's been some time since we paid attention to what Sarah Palin's favorite former Uber-Patriotic Arm Decoration/Bling Bling has been up to - but in the midst of this critical debate on Heath Care I think it's time we got our PUSH BACK ON, and hard.

Vyan

Wednesday, November 25

Perino: Bush Never Had a Terrorist Attack (Oh, Really....?)

Just when you think these people couldn't be more clueless and deluded - they up the ante. Check this out.



Dana Perino: There is one thing about Ft. Hood that I would like to say because I feel very strongly, and it's not politic, we need to call it what it is so we can prevent it from happening again. We did not have a terrorist attack during the Bush Administration, I hope they're not looking at this politically


Oh no she d'int... Oh, yes she did!

Hey, exactly who the FRACK was President when This happened?

Hint: It wasn't the guy who diddled an intern with a cigar...









Or for that matter - when THIS Happened?





Getting Warmer?

Just for the record, since we're talking about a mad shooting spree, who was President when this guy shot and killed 32 PEOPLE at Virginia Tech?



Update: Or how about this recently executed guy, named Muhammad, who used a sniper gun to stage a campaign of "Terror" in what city was it again - oh yeah, Washington D.C. in 2002 - but y'know that wasn't Terrorism!




Might it have been - This Doufus?



Look, my comment here isn't political because I've already said the same thing in response to Joe Lieberman, but Ft Hood was NOT a "Terrorist Attack". Maj Hasan did not have ties to al Qaeda, the clerik he sent emails to doesn't have ties to al Qeada - the FBI investigated those emails and found they had nothing out of the ordinary, or outside Dr. Hasan's field of research in them.


The major, a 39-year-old US-born Muslim of Palestinian descent, was scrutinised by an FBI-led joint terrorism task force because of a series of e-mails between December 2008 and early 2009 with Mr al-Awlaki.

US officials said the content of the e-mail messages did not advocate or threaten violence, and was consistent with Maj Hasan's research for his job as an army psychiatrist, part of which involved post-traumatic stress disorder stemming from US combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Shouting "Alluha Akbar" (which has been disputed by several witnesses) is really not anymore odd than saying "Praise Jesus" under stressful situations.

Dana, sometimes the easy and stupid answer, isn't the Correct answer.

Hasan's coworkers at Walter Reed said he showed signs of being Psychotic

Starting in the spring of 2008, key officials from Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences held a series of meetings and conversations, in part about Maj. Nidal Hasan, the man accused of killing 13 people and wounding dozens of others last week during a shooting spree at Fort Hood. One of the questions they pondered: Was Hasan psychotic?

"Put it this way," says one official familiar with the conversations that took place. "Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole."


Exactly what was going on in his head we don't quite yet know and in that vein I'd like to repeat myself (to quote what I said to Senator Joe).

It's not "terrorism" simply because the man was a devout muslim or had an arabic last name anymore than someone should assume this was "gang violence" influenced if the shooter had been black or "mafia related" if he'd been Italian. That's BIGOTRY!!


But I'll tall you what Honeybunch, if you're standard for a "Terrorist Attack" is ONE GUY - count 'em ONE - who all on his own decides to go on a violent shooting spree for possibly religious and/or policy issues with the U.S. and administration then I have to admit that "Yes, there have benn Terrorist Attacks during the Obama Administration".

We've had this guy allegedly shoot and kill an OB/GYN in order to make a religous and political point about the "Santity of Life":



Or this guy who walked into a Unitarian Church in Knoxville Tennesse and shot 4 people - killing 2 of them - because they were, in his opinion, too "Liberal"?



From Adkisson's "Note":
"Know this if nothing else: This was a hate crime. I hate the damn left-wing liberals. There is a vast left-wing conspiracy in this country & these liberals are working together to attack every decent & honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state. Shame on them....


Or this guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum in Washington killing a security guard who was opening the door for him...



Or this guy who killed three Pittsburgh Police Officers either because he was frustrated with his girlfriend or "Obama Wants to Take Away My Guns" - or both.



Yeah, Dana if Maj Hasan's shooting spree at Ft. Hood is your standard - to paraphase Jerry Lee Lewis - then I'd say there's a "Whole Lot of Terrorism Goin' On".

Vyan

Yanking the Mistake Chain: Fox institutes Zero Tolerance Policy for On-Screen Errors

This just in from Fox (Opinion Channel/Guessworks Inc/GOP TV) News... via Thinkprogress



Last Thursday, Fox News issued an on-air apology after ThinkProgress reported that the network had recycled old file footage of Sarah Palin rallies to assert that she is currently getting huge turnouts on her book tour.

...

Now, FishbowlDC reports that Fox’s management has issued a memo declaring that “Effective immediately, there is zero tolerance for on-screen errors”:


So I guess that means that the next time someone at Fox claims, for example, that the President was educated at a Madrossa - there will be HELL TO PAY?!

Somehow I think not.

Looks like this bit from Jon Stewart actually got under Fox Thin Skin even deeper than we realized.



The actual release from Fox has to be read to be believed...

Effective immediately, there is zero tolerance for on-screen errors. Mistakes by any member of the show team that end up on air may result in immediate disciplinary action against those who played significant roles in the “mistake chain,” and those who supervise them. That may include warning letters to personnel files, suspensions, and other possible actions up to and including termination, and this will all obviously play a role in performance reviews. So we now face a great opportunity to review and improve on our workflow and quality control efforts. To make the most of that opportunity, effective immediately, Newsroom is going to “zero base” our newscast production. That means we will start by going to air with only the most essential, basic, and manageable elements. To share a key quote from today’s meeting: “It is more important to get it right, than it is to get it on.” We may then build up again slowly as deadlines and workloads allow so that we can be sure we can quality check everything before it makes air, and we never having to explain, retract, qualify or apologize again. Please know that jobs are on the line here. I can not stress that enough.


So I guess the next time something like the following Epic Mistake Chain occurs we can expect Heads to Roll right?

Yep, bet on it.



Like when Mark Sanford (The Run-Away Governor) was identified as a Democrat on Fox News?



Or when Fox Claimed that a Joe Biden quote from six month earlier about "the fundamentals of the economy are strong" ...



...was brand new?



How about the Terrorist Fist Jab?



Or when a Fox Host Insulted Canada as "Capri Pants wearing" wussies?



Or when Fox Commenter Liz Trotta Joked about Killing Obama?



Or when a Fox News "Reporter" claimed Obama busy watching an HBO documentary about himself instead of the Election Results this November?



Ok, now that Fox Management has decided to "Put Their Foot Down" we can expect that they won't be yanking the mistake chain again anytime soon...

Yeah, Riiiiight!!.

Y'know just because Some people Say that Fox News is filled with a pack of Deluded Neo-Con Fascist Anti-Democratic Douche Nozzles - doesn't mean it's a "Mistake" to wonder if that only applies to just 50% of their staff or 80%...

I Reportify, You Decide.

Vyan