Thursday, February 23, 2012

Annoy a Palin - watch "Game Change!" The full "preview package": Behind the scenes, conversations with the actors, trailers - GET ANGRY, SARAH!

By Patrick

"It'a all accurate" - Mark Halperin, co-author of "Game Change"
about the depiction of Sarah Palin in his book


The "war of realities" has begun - Sarah Palin's reality against the reality of the other 99%, so to speak. The AP reported today the outrage of Sarah Palin's "aides" - the people who are on the payroll of SarahPAC. As was to be expected, Sarah Palin's servants dutifully people rallied around the "Governor" and loudly denounced the upcoming HBO movie "Game Change", with good old trusty Megan "Alaska big mouth" Stapleton even calling the movie "sick":


Interestingly, Frank Bailey described in his book "Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin" exactly that: The close circle around Sarah Palin was expected to defend Palin under all costs against accusations which quite frequently were directed at Palin. The Governor fumed, raged, screamed, and her subordinates had to defend her honour. Therefore it's like a "deja vu" - and of course it didn't matter that Sarah's busy staffers haven't even seen the movie yet. Sarah has to be defended, period!

It's exactly like the conservative Alaska pundit and former radio-talk show host Dan Fagan wrote in November 2009 in his immortal essay titled "Sarah Palin: A Dark Soul":

She is a grudge carrier. Settling scores drive her and she is hell bent on revenge, payback, getting even. (...)

She has no self-control when it comes to letting things go. She must settle the score. She must. She Will!

So now it's time to settle the score the makers of the "Game Change" movie and the authors of the book. It's that simple. Because everyone lies - apart from Sarah Palin. It has never been any different.

This might come as a surprise to the authors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann. One has just only to watch for example their interview from 15th March 2010 to realise that they probably didn't expect such harsh attacks.

In the following clip from about 46:00, they start to talk about Sarah Palin in detail. Mark Halperin says that the depiction of Sarah Palin is actually "empathetic towards her" and also provides "a very balanced view." But above all, Mark Halperin stresses: "It's all accurate!" - and Halperin even mentions that in contrast other things which have been written about Sarah Palin elsewhere sometimes "have not been accurate."


It's almost amusing to observe that Mark Halperin was apparently under the impression that Sarah Palin is a sane, rational human being. I do hope that he has seen the light now!


Watch:




So let's "annoy a Palin" - here is the "full HBO preview package" for "Game Change" - enjoy!

"Behind the Scenes Featurette":


"Conversations with the Authors":



"Trailer 1":



"Trailer 2":


"Preview 1":



"Preview 2":


Will Sarah Palin watch "Game Change?" She denies it. But we don't believe her. She will watch it. She must. She Will!

+++

UPDATE:

The interview with Steve Schmidt on "60 Minutes" with Anderson Cooper is also worth revisiting: 


(Many thanks for the suggestion, HIG!)

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Frank Bailey, Sarah Palin's former top aide has to pay $11,900 fine for publishing "confidential" emails in his book "Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin" - UPDATES!

By Kathleen

The press release cited below was sent to me directly from our friend Andree McLeod. 

As also reported by the ADN, Frank Bailey sent a copy of the manuscript for his book, Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin, to the Attorney General who asked for certain confidential information to be removed. Bailey did not remove all of the information identified as confidential, and for this and other reasons the following fines were imposed:


$3,600 for using confidential information in drafting his book; $7,200 for disclosing confidential information to his two co-authors; and $1,100 for publishing confidential information after he was advised it was secret.

Screenshot from the settlement:



*******                                              

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                               Tuesday, February 21, 2012


AnchorageAlaska:  Sarah Palin’s top aide Frank Bailey has agreed to pay civil penalties totaling $11,900 to resolve an ethics complaint.  The complaint was filed on September, 2010 by Andrée McLeod when she learned that Bailey misused confidential documents and emails he had acquired while he worked for Palin.

“Justice has yet to be served.  I have called on the Attorney General to reveal all the public’s documents and emails that Bailey confiscated and shared with others when he left state employment.”

McLeod and members of the media have requested all of Palin’s email communications for the time she was Alaska’s governor.  Although some have been revealed, many couldn’t be located because of Palin’s rampant use of private email accounts for official business, and thousands more remain undisclosed asAlaska’s governor’s office cites executive privileges and other delay tactics    
   
“Every one of those confidential and still undisclosed public documents that were in Bailey’s possession must be made public, immediately, as Bailey broke the chain of custody when he illegally shared them with his co-authors Jeanne Devon and Ken Morris,” McLeod said. 

“This is the second time that Sarah’s go-to guy has been found to have crossed the line.  The first was back in November of 2008 when I filed another complaint against Sarah and her staff, including Bailey,” McLeod said.

McLeod continues, “This agreement proves, yet again, that Sarah Palin’s account of her role in reforming Alaska’s government while governor is truly the only real ‘false narrative’ being bandied about.”

# # #
FOR DOWNLOAD:


The settlement agreement from the AK Department of Law.

The initial September, 2010 McLeod complaint.

We say that all the emails should be published now - without exception.

You never know what nuggets one could find!

+++

Note by Patrick: 

In order to avoid a misunderstanding, let me just say the following: We are very grateful that Frank Bailey and his co-authors published "Blind Allegiance", as the book provides unique insights into the "real" Sarah Palin. The book didn't get the attention it really deserved - however, the dreadful controversy with Joe McGinness also significantly contributed to the fact that the book was partially ignored.

If Frank Bailey had just handed all the emails over to the State of Alaska, then the Alaskan government would have probably redacted (=censored) a huge number of them. This can still happen, of course. The leaked manuscript and the published book provided us with invaluable information, for example about the fact the Sarah Palin couldn't even prove that she was pregnant while she was supposedly pregnant with Trig - and was also desperate at the same time to find ways to fight the rumours.

Pretty, pretty strange if you supposedly carry a huge baby in your belly, or supposedly gave birth just a few days ago...But the media just ignored all of this, and rather presented the former AP-reporter Steve Quinn as a "crown witness" for the fact that Sarah Palin was indeed pregnant - when in reality Steve Quinn himself was labelled as a "cheerleader" for the Palin administration by Palin's closest staff in the published emails, just to give one example, and also had a love affair with Sarah Palin's top aide Ivy Frye! Needless to say that these facts were ignored by the media as well, which makes Justin Elliott's "definite debunker" in "Salon" the biggest embarrassment ever of this distinguished liberal website. When it comes to Sarah Palin, even liberal journalists are willing without hesitation to ignore facts and reason.

So I can see that Frank Bailey was between a rock and a hard place. It was a difficult choice. My hope is that we will now see all the emails, with only very small redactions, and they should prove very interesting indeed, as Sarah Palin has more secrets than the CIA (almost).

+++

Update by Patrick:

In the comments, I had the following exchange with Phil Munger from Progressive Alaska:

Philip Munger Today 09:35 AM 


I beg to differ with my good friend Patrick on both the quality of Blind Allegiance and to the reasons - he seems to place a degree of blame on the McGinniss controversy - the book failed. It was hastily and poorly written by a team that never had any chemistry that could make the product into a resonant statement. Additionally, as Geoffrey Dunn so clearly wrote soon after BA came out, it is the third Troopergate coverup.  


I applaud comments here and at the post at IM that reach out to Bailey to release all he stole. Maybe he could turn it over to wikileaks for free. 


 I doubt he will, but we should try to encourage him. 


 Andree, as always, is one of the few true heroes we have here in Alaska.

My reply was:


Patrick - Politicalgates Today 12:54 PM in reply to Philip Munger 


Phil, it's of course true that the book had flaws, as our friend Geoffrey Dunn also pointed out, but it still had a lot to offer, as it contained damning information, especially emails, which could be found nowhere else. It certainly still served as an eye-opener for many people. In this tiresome, endless fight against the lies and manipulations of Sarah Palin it allowed a rare view on the workings of her very own "spin machine." The authors "blew it" and for example got into an amateurish confrontation with Joe McGinniss and others. My hope now is that some positive result will follow, and that we will see many more emails.


+++

This is a very controversial issue, and it seems difficult to come to a consensus. We have seen a clash of personalities and opinions in the past as far as Frank Bailey's book was concerned, and the controversies still linger on. Maybe there will never be a resolution. I my view it's important to look forward and to try to use this "crack" in the wall which has been caused by Bailey's book - the "crack" in the "wall of secrecy" which the State of Alaska has built around Sarah Palin, declaring everything "private" or "confidential" which might expose Sarah Palin's numerous secrets. After all, even if Sarah Palin is gone, her influence can still be seen, also due to the fact that Sean Parnell took over a considerable number of Palin's closest staff members. These people have of course no interest in seeing their former boss disgraced.

+++

Update 2 (by Patrick):

I looked into "Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin" again, and these are two of my "most favourite" emails by Sarah Palin:

From: Sarah
To: Scott Heyworth
Cc: Todd Palin
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 10:19 AM
Subject: Todd's son
Scott:
Todd just told me you had spoken with him awhile back and reported that some law enforcement friends of yours claimed some dumbass lie about Track not being Todd's son? This really, really disgusts me and ticks me off.
I want to know right now who said it, who would ever lie about such a thing... this is the type of bullshit lie about family that WILL keep me from running for Governor. I hate this kind of crap. I thought it was bad enough that my kids have been lied about recently regarding illegal activities that they had NO part in whatsoever. But a stupid claim like one of our kids isn't fathered by Todd?
I want to know NOW what this latest b.s. is all about because I want to get to the bottom of this garbage rumor mill. People who lie like this may know me well enough to KNOW THAT I WILL ALWAYS PUT FAMILY FIRST, AND IF UGLY LIES LIKE THIS ARE BELIEVED BY ANYONE AND ADVERSELY AFFECT MY HUSBAND AND KIDS... I WILL PULL OUT OF THE RACE BECAUSE IT'S NOT WORTH IT - AT ALL - TO LET MY FAMILY BE VICTIMS OF DARK, UGLY POLITICS LIKE THIS. 

She addressed this "lie" also in a follow-up email to "a large list of supports", as Frank Bailey reports:

This reminds me of the allegation that was ― "anonymously" leaked to the media that falsely accused me of having a felony on my record by attaching a false court document to the lie that was sent to the press. It‘s also reminiscent of the false allegations that my children aren‘t really mine and my husband‘s. Oh, and of course, the ol‘ ― "I saw her on a train headed to Seward with a guy she‘s having an affair with" lie that also got back to me. Oh please. This aspect of politics stink, this is why good folks sometimes don‘t offer themselves up to serve in public office. But back to the real subject here. If this is all they got on me, it‘s pretty pathetic. I‘ve been warned that party operatives would dig as deep as they could to try to destroy my reputation. It‘s almost funny that this is all they‘ve got. Let me help them out a bit and make their search for ―"dirt" a little easier. I got a ―"D" in a micro-econ course once in college, 20 years ago, Todd and I eloped – we didn‘t have a real wedding, um, I‘m not perfect, I make mistakes everyday. Heck, today I hollered at the wrong child when I accused one of not taking out the trash on their day to do so. I was wrong. I apologize. That‘s about it. All the skeletons are out of the closet.

Frank Bailey himself offers some interesting, although in my view also slightly "bizarre" thoughts about these two telling emails and writes in "Blind Allegiance":

Defensive emails like this did more to breathe life into speculation than end it. That Sarah raised sordid issues to a previously unaware audience generated new questions. Personally, I never made the connection nor did I read the blogs that did so. Neither did I follow up and wonder who Track‘s father was if not Todd? Or what guy on what train? But thousands (eventually millions) of others did.

The rumours about Track parentage are true. As I already revealed at "Palingates" in 2010 and early 2011, Todd is not the biological father of Track. His real father is Curtis Menard Jr., who was officially Track's Godfather and died in a mysterious plane crash in 2001. We can only speculate which other dark family secrets are connected with this story. It is no surprise at all that Sarah Palin freaked out in these emails!

Just as with the allegation that Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy with Trig (which is also a true fact), we never ever heard anything from Sarah Palin's lawyers. No retractions was ever demanded. There was just big, long silence. This is not surprising at all, as our sources regarding the pregnancy as well as Track's parentage were excellent.

So Sarah Palin's reaction to the rumous in the emails quoted above is very telling. If one of her secrets is brought up (and there are many of them), then she screams and rages until hopefully the whole affair will calm down again, but in fact, there is nothing she can really do, no court action etc. - because the claims are true. That's a pattern we have seen over and over again. It's Sarah Palin's very own way of "proactive defense." And with the US media fast asleep as far as Sarah Palin's private scandals are concerned, this strategy works very well.

+++

Update 3 (by Patrick):

There is another extremely interesting email exchange in "Blind Allegiance", one which also has been largely overlooked, like so many other exchanges, although it's more relevant than ever. This exchange doesn't concern her private scandals, usually my favourite subject, but a man that Sarah Palin cuddled up to during recent weeks - Newt Gingrich.

In June 2009, as Frank Bailey explains in the book, Newt Gingrich "landed on Sarah's enemy list."  Sarah was supposed to be the keynote speaker at an annual congressional fund-raising dinner on June 8, 2009 in Washington DC.

Two days before, on June 6, 2009, Geoffrey Dunn published an article in Huffington Post and showed that Sarah Palin, well, recycled (=plagiarized) an older article by Newt Gingrich and used parts of it for one of her speeches. If this article by Geoffrey Dunn in Huffington Post or her "hesitation" to accept the invitation, as Bailey mentions, was to blame, is not known. But fact is that Sarah was kicked out on short notice and was replaced with Newt Gingrich. Naturally, the famous Governor was furious and wrote in an email on June 7:

From: gsph
Subject: Fw: Newt

I don't know why we have to protect the elites who do things like this so we don't "ruffle feathers- by keeping it to ourselves. Newt "uninvited" me yesterday to speak at tomorrow's NSRC [NRSC, the National Republican Senatorial Committee]. I was the surprise guest . . . I know Meg [Stapleton] leaked it to Politico, then would get up to do a surprise speech and introduction of Newt. So I went from being the invited keynote speaker back in February, to just the surprise introducer of the speaker this month, to the hack-of-the-bus'er ("sit down and shut up") the day before the event. One of the organizers told Meg last night that Newt pulled the plug. said he didn't want me to "steal the show". . . . maybe there's something others see in Newt. . . . Keep this confidential until we figure out how I'm supposed to explain flying all the flippin' way across the country—leaving my baby at home—to be at this dinner, then we get accused of dodging the substantive events like the NSRC, when in reality they kicked us to the curb. I hate politics.

Later that day, another message from Sarah followed:

Yes, (Newt/GOP) are egotistical, narrow minded machine goons . . . but all the more reason God protected me from getting up on stage in front of 5000 political and media "elites" to praise him, then it be shown across the nation. At some point Newt would have shown his true colors anyway and we would have been devastated having known we'd earlier prostituted ourselves up in front of the country introducing him and acting like that good ol' rich white guy is the savior of the party.

Does Newt Gingrich actually know that Sarah Palin called him an "egotistical, narrow minded machine goon" - and expected he would "show his true colors?"

Sarah, what are Newt Gingrich's "true colors?"

Sarah, if you "hate politics", maybe you should just quit.

Annoy a Palin, quote her emails.

+++

Please re-tweet:

https://twitter.com/#!/politicalgates/status/172425473857568768

https://twitter.com/#!/politicalgates/status/172422922521149441

https://twitter.com/#!/politicalgates/status/172425004582043648

https://twitter.com/#!/politicalgates/status/172423784568066048

https://twitter.com/#!/politicalgates/status/172435669451407360

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Election 2012: Ousting the Obstreperous Obstructionists

by Sunnyjane



Listen closely and you can hear it.   It’s that roar coming from the House Chamber, where the shouts of NO reverberate so violently and with such consistency that the ghosts of Congresses past cover their ears and hang their heads in sorrow and shame.  


It is the sound of legislators with the wisdom and experience of a grape seed, and hearts and souls that are blacker than a witch’s liver.  It is the members of the Tea Party, that Koch-funded grassroots gang of so-called "real Americans" who are raucously encouraged  by such pea brains as Ron Paul (the "intellectual godfather" of the Tea Bagger movement), his head-stomp-sanctioning son Rand Paul, Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Eric Cantor, and Michele Bachmann.  


This particular Congress is not ready, not willing, and not able to perform the jobs they were elected to do as representatives of the people.  On the contrary,  for thirteen months they have supported the drive to push the United States of America into a state of disaster.   It’s time to send them back to their home districts where they can resume their wretched little lives in the ignoble obscurity they so richly deserve.


The Failure of the 112th Congress


Thirteen percent of American adults believe that the current Congress is doing a dandy job.  I don’t know for certain, but they may well be the ones who are signing up for Newt’s moon colony because he has promised to take along some poor kids to clean the toilets in the honeymoon suites. 

Three percent of the voting population either don't know or are undecided about the issue.   These are the same people who have to consult with their Rite Aid pharmacist about how to use a rectal thermometer.

The remaining eighty-four percent of us know very well that these so-called Representatives have accomplished little more than to name some Post Office buildings.   That is hardly what they were sent to Washington for, and we are ticked off to the max.  As John Adams, thoroughly irritated with the Continental Congress's unwillingness to vote on the question of independence, so aptly stated in  1776:  

I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace; that two are called a law firm; and that three or more  become a Congress! And by God, I have had it with this Congress!

There is but one recourse for the Eighty-Four Percent.    Andrew Sullivan fairly well nailed it when he wrote in Vanity Fair recently, The only way out of that deadlock is an electoral rout of the GOP, since the language of victory and defeat seems to be the only thing it understands. 

The Objective: Recall and Replace  


As I wrote in a previous post, it is imperative that we clean the House and Senate of the obstructionist Tea Party members who are only there because in 2010 the Republican Party thought it was a brilliant means of thwarting the pro-middle-American agenda of President Barack Obama.  In this post I will talk about two of these people who need to be replaced with representatives who are, at the least, willing to work with the president.  This post will briefly summarize the political histories and current agendas of these so-called legislators in the House of Representatives who are currently accepting very nice tax-paid salaries and very affordable tax-payer subsidized healthcare plans to crush the lives and liberties of ninety-nine percent of Americans.  


Profiling the Poseurs of the Far-Right 112th Congress


Daniel A. "Dan" Webster served for twenty-eight years in the Florida legislature and won handily against Democrat Alan Grayson in 2010, proving that most of the voters in the 8th District may well be as anal on social issues as Webster himself.

A pro-life “right-wing social engineer” of the worst kind, Webster wants to ensure that the government has the power to decide when we’re born, how we marry, and under what circumstances we die.  It is pure hypocrisy that the party of smaller government should attempt with such passion  to enact legislation that actually allows government to sets rules on how Americans should live their lives.

On Birth:  As anti-abortion as any religious extremist drawing breath today, Webster proposed a bill in 2008 forcing all women planning to undergo an abortion receive an ultrasound, but giving them a choice of whether to see the live images of the fetus.  Sadly, this bill eventually passed.

On Marriage:  Back in 1990, Webster proposed a bill in the Florida legislature on covenant marriage, which could only be dissolved on grounds of adultery.   The proposal stated, in part, that the husband-and wife-to-be would have to have their parents' permission and attend premarital counseling by a member of the clergy or a marriage counselor before proceeding. As part of their marriage license, the husband and wife would then have to sign notarized documents declaring:  I, (insert name), do hereby declare my intent to enter in Covenant Marriage. I do so with the full understanding that a Covenant Marriage may not be dissolved except by reason of adultery. I have attended premarital counseling in good faith and understand my responsibilities to the marriage. I promise to seek counsel in times of trouble. I believe that I have chosen my life-mate wisely and have disclosed to him or her all facts that may adversely affect his or her decision to enter in this covenant with me.  Astute readers will notice that there is no mention of physical or mental abuse in this bill.  As his opponent, Alan Grayson, said during the 2010 campaign, Dan Webster’s bill reduces the institution of marriage to a roach motel: You can check in, but you can’t check out.   Fortunately, this particular piece of regressive legislation was not enacted.


On Death:  Webster inserted his self-righteous notions into the Terri Schiavo case, which involved an ugly legal battle between Schiavo’s parents and her husband on whether to remove the feeding tube of the unconscious woman, who had been in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) for fifteen years.  When the feeding tube was removed by court order in March 2005,  Webster introduced a bill that would have prohibited such patients from being denied food and water if family members disagreed on the patient's wishes and if the patient had not expressed his wishes in writing when competent.  The bill failed to pass the Senate by three votes.  The subsequent autopsy backed Schiavo's husband and doctors in their contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind. 

After successfully campaigning on a platform of  smaller, streamlined government, spending cuts, budget roll backs, tax cuts and increasing the protection of personal rights (does everyone see the irony here?) against Grayson in 2010, Webster flew into Washington via the encouraging wings of the Tea Party, took his rightful place with all the other entry-level life forms, and has faithfully marched to Eric Cantor's Koch drum ever since.

In his first year as a U.S. Congressman, Webster has done little except support the Ryan Budget Plan.  It is encouraging to know that he has made neither the conservatives nor other voters in Orlando happy.   The once-supportive Tea Party jumped all over him for not pushing hard enough to cut the federal budget, while angry attendees at one of his town hall meetings lashed out at him for his support of the budget plan.  As Think Progress reported in April 2011, the attendees' criticism was so fierce that Webster didn't just avoid the questions by resorting to talking points... On numerous occasions, [he] simply declined to give an answer to contentious questions altogether, moving on to take a new question instead.  

Alan Grayson announced in July 2011 that he will run in November to regain this seat.  Let's assume that the voters of that district have sufficiently recovered from their little 2010 fit of rebellion  and that they will vote  to end Webster's reign as their too-far-right representative.


Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan has been taking up valuable space in the House since 1999.   One of his more dubious jobs before becoming a kowtowing-to-the-far-right congressman was legislative director for then-Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas.   Surely you remember now-Governor Brownback, who got his shorts in a swivet when a high school senior had the temerity to tweet something rather benignly negative about him back in November 2011.   The thin-skinned governor did a third-grade tattletale routine on her to the school board, demanding an apology.  She refused.  (Chuckle, snort, snicker.)

After a grueling eight years of doing little but voting Yes on everything that George W. Bush expected from his various congresses, Ryan was finally tasked with something for which he could use his less-than-evident skills. 


The Young GunsRyan and cohorts Eric Cantor of Virginia and Kevin McCarthy of California founded this group, a recruitment and campaign strategic plan by House Republicans to protect their senate and congressional seats and help elect new GOP candidates across the nation in the 2007 and 2008 election cycles.   New “members” in this little society could be assured that the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) would help fund their campaigns.   They were so successful in the mid-term 2010 elections that the House captured the majority.  And the program is alive and well for 2012, this time being managed by Pete Sessions of Texas, Greg Walden of Oregon, and Steve Scalise of Louisiana.  As Sessions told Politico in November 2011, We are committed to staying on offense, and the goals for every level of Young Guns demand aggressive action and innovative strategies for candidates to build winning campaigns.  Some names to look for (and vote against) are Randy Altschuler of New York, Andy Barr of Kentucky,  Jackie Walorski of Indiana, Brendan Doherty of Rhode Island, and Steve Daines of Montana.  


The Man with the Plan:  It probably would have served the country well if Ryan’s mother had let him be come the ski bum she feared he might turn out to be.   But no, she couldn’t leave well enough alone, and in early 2011 her son introduced the GOP’s proposed budget plan for 2012 and beyond, quaintly titled The Path to Prosperity.   This anti-middle-America “road map” turned out to be a trip down easy street for the rich and A Faster Road to Disparity for the remaining ninety-nine percent of American citizens.  A few lowlights highlights of this plan that was no doubt scripted by ALEC at the direction of his buddies the Koch Brothers, at whose super secret “annual retreats” Ryan is a regular attendee:


Medicare:  The Center for Economic and Policy Research published a study, based largely on Congressional Budget Office calculations, advising that the Ryan Plan would add trillions of dollars to the cost of Medicare due to the lower efficiency of private insurance as compared to the current Government program.  

Changes to Tax Laws:  While proposing the elimination of tax loopholes and deductions, the GOP budget fails to name exactly which of these would be abolished.  The Atlantic disparaged the plan’s proposal by writing, A plan that proposes to eliminate tax loopholes and deductions, but doesn't say what any of those are, is neither brave nor serious. It is, instead canny—or cynical, take your pick.  This is a chicken-hearted move for the GOP, because they know Americans would not accept some of the more popular deductions.   For instance, would they dare to say aloud that a deduction like home-mortgage interest payments should be cut?   I don’t think so. 

Defense Spending:   Ryan's proposal would increase the budget for national defense by $22 billion to a total of $583 billion in fiscal 2012, and would provide defense increases each year, leading to a $642 billion defense budget in 2016.  (It is hardly breaking news that the GOP loves the Defense Department, but hates middle-and lower-income Americans.) 

In a recent interview with Ed Schultz of MSNBC, Rep. Bernie Sanders of Vermont had some rather harsh words for Mr. Ryan’s little plan, at one point saying, I think clearly what Ryan is about is continuing the Republican effort to engage in class warfare. Who in their right mind could support a proposal which says more tax breaks for the wealthiest people and yet we’ll cut Medicare and Medicaid in drastic form.

Fortunately (and somewhat amusingly, I might add), all has not gone well for The Path to Prosperity.   Representatives across the country faced angry constituents at town hall meetings in 2011 and found it almost impossible to defend the proposed budget.  In an effort to avoid the indignity of such an audience, Ryan decided to charge a $15 fee for his own town hall meeting last September and ended up having twenty fee-paying constituents thrown out and three arrested.   How'd that pay-per-view thingy work out for ya, Congressman Ryan?  And of course, there’s the hilarious statement by Newt Gingrich in May 2011, in which he called Ryan’s budget plan right-wing social engineering.  To which Ryan replied on Laura Ingraham’s show, With allies like that, who needs the left?    




Paul Ryan needs to go back to Wisconsin and resume one of his former jobs: driving a Wienermobile for Oscar Mayer.









End Note 

In subsequent posts, I will continue to profile the obstructionists.  The Republicans intend to do everything possible to maintain their House majority and take control of the Senate by propping up their current herd of regressive sycophants and rounding up more of the same.  Progressives must be just as focused in order to take back the House and protect or increase the majority in the Senate.   Not only is it important for President Obama's second-term pro-America agenda, but it's imperative that we keep the bozos out of our bedrooms!


A warning to Republicans, courtesy of Bob Dylan:


Come senators, congressmen, please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway, don't block up the hall.
For he that gets hurt will be he who has stalled, 
There's a battle outside and it’s ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls,
For the times they are a-changin'.

Monday, February 20, 2012

WeeklyX2 Roundup, February 6-19, 2012

By BlueberryT

Sorry to be missing in action lately – I’ve missed you! I have been working around the clock on a big project, and am not finished yet, so I will be in and out for a while. Hopefully I’ll catch up someday….

Tuesday, February 8, 2012
Sunnyjane introduced us to Carter Godwin Woodson, the son of former slaves who became a distinguished scholar, teacher and pioneer in education and black history. Woodson earned undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of Chicago in 1908 and a PhD in History from Harvard University in 1912 (only the second awarded by Harvard to an African American). Woodson’s research and writing chronicled the rich history and contributions of African Americans, as well as the obstacles they faced in gaining an education and exercising their citizenship. He organized the first Negro History Week in 1926, coinciding with the birthdays of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln; this evolved into the official designation of February as Black History Month. Thanks to Sunnyjane for teaching us about this man, whose life work brought recognition and respect for the huge contributions of African Americans to our society.
Wednesday, February 9, 2012
Kathleen reported on Santorum’s wins in 3 states, which upset Rom[o]ney’s clear path to the nomination and his standing as front-runner in the GOP primaries. The “Santorum surge” (oh, dear!) is inviting more scrutiny of Santorum’s record and more great videos; Kathleen included some for your entertainment – so have a good laugh at Rick’s expense! Although Santorum’s latest statements on the GOP’s extreme position on contraception and the overall hysteria taking place about birth control happened after this post, I figured the cartoon would help tie these themes together…
February 9th, 10th and 13th, 2012
The Sudden Death of the Living Wage
Nomad has written another excellent series, this one on the death of the living wage. Rom[o]ney’s recent gaffes about not worrying about the poor, then asserting his support for indexed increases in the minimum wage, brought attention to the issue of the living wage. Nomad clearly distinguishes between the “living wage” – how much a person needs to meet the essential costs of living – and the minimum wage that employers must pay for labor. This link will lead you to a calculator for each area of the country – it is eye-opening to see what it costs to live for an individual, let alone a family. The discrepancy between the minimum wage and the living wage (actual cost of living) makes clear why the “working poor” is probably the fastest growing class in America.
In Part 2, Nomad tackled the GOP myths about the U.S. being a meritocracy where free market principles should reign supreme. Right-wing think tanks like the Manhattan Institute, which is funded by the Koch Brothers, among others, provide talking points linking opposition to the living wage, privatization, unions and regulation. They claim all these things kill jobs, but facts prove otherwise. Nomad then explores the roots of the Living Wage movement. None other than Roman Catholic Pope Leo XIII issued a letter that admonished employers to pay sufficient wages so that workers could meet their families’ needs, live without hardship and improve their lot over time. He also encouraged workers to stand up for their rights. (Newt, Rick, are you paying attention – this is the Pope’s word, which to you is infallible and absolute, right?) The Pope’s letter influenced one of the founders of the living wage movement, Monsignor Ryan, who wrote A Living Wage and advocated for economic justice. One of the most surprising proponents of this movement was Henry Ford, who doubled his employees’ wages as a matter of mutual benefit, as contented workers stayed in their jobs, cut training costs, and became customers for Ford automobiles.
In Part 3, Nomad looked at ACORN, an organization serving the poor that worked very effectively for years to promote the living wage and other key tenets of economic justice. At the root of this work is the principle that no one who is working full-time should have to live in poverty. ACORN developed a tremendous network of community-level organizers who provided essential services to those who have been disempowered and disadvantaged in America. It was very successful in promoting a living wage in many cities. At its core, ACORN was reputable, but it suffered from some mismanagement and corruption (although nothing in comparison to the well-documented corruption of entities like Dyncorp and Halliburton, whose corruption has been rewarded with ever more government contracts). ACORN’s success attracted the attention of the right-wing, who began systematically attacking ACORN on several fronts, including the unscrupulous, deceptive sting campaign by James O’Keefe III that brought him notoriety. These attacks were in effect the “character assassination” of an effective, progressive organization. Unfortunately, they were successful, resulting in the defunding of ACORN by the government and NGO funders and causing its demise.
BBT: Seeing the crises over “austerity” in Europe, including reductions in the minimum wage and other worker protections, makes clear that this attack on the living wage is a global strategy to roll back wages and progressive economic policies in countries where they have been the norm. Expect to see more of this, here and abroad. Fortunately, some counterbalance is also occurring, such as the effective negative publicity about slave wages at Nike and Apple factories and the recent announcement of a 25% increase in wages at Foxconn factories in China that manufacture products for Apple, Microsoft, Dell and HP. It is beyond unfortunate that conditions have to get so bad that workers are driven to suicide before anything changes, however.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
After several years of flipping CPAC off, Sarah Palin finally deigned to speak at the annual conservative hate-fest. Even to some who previously worshipped Palin, this was a bald-faced ploy to reinsert herself into the political discourse and proclaim her own relevance. It’s also now apparent (from comments a few days later) that she is waiting in the wings for her anointment as the Republican nominee in the event of a brokered convention; H/T to all of you who have been saying this was her strategy for months now. The post includes Wonkette’s inimitable “deconstructing” of the speech – more lies and misinformation about the economy, dismissive and condescending criticisms of the President – the standard Palin swill.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Kathleen and Patrick highlight the upcoming release of the movie “Game Change,” starring Julianne Moore as Sarah Palin. The trailer makes clear that it will show her experiencing a mental breakdown. Of course, Palin is now trying to discredit and deflect attention from the movie, which she claims is a “false narrative” that she will not watch (right!). She conveniently omits mention of the fact that she declined the opportunity to help ensure the accuracy of the film while it was in production. This post includes a number of must-see videos, including very damaging comments by senior McCain-Palin campaign staffers Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt. They both make clear that Palin was not only difficult; not only uninformed; not only uncooperative; but that she was mean-sprited, vindictive, cynical and mentally unstable.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
KatieAnnieOakley attended a MoveOn screening of the Academy Award-winning documentary, Inside Job. (Highly recommended; here is a quote from producer Charles Ferguson’s the acceptance speech: "Forgive me, I must start by pointing out that three years after our horrific financial crisis caused by massive fraud, not a single financial executive has gone to jail, and that's wrong.") The screening forms the backdrop for KAO’s post about her personal experience in the mortgage industry a decade ago, closing loans at a frantic pace, including many sub-prime loans that she knew the buyers could never manage to pay back. She describes what essentially became a racket—charging “usuriously high fees” and “churning” as many loans as possible because the fees were the profit center. These companies did not actually hold the mortgages, so they had no “skin in the game” – others were taking the risk, which after the housing industry collapse and bailout, meant that we taxpayers actually were the ones who paid the price, along with those who lost their homes. KAO was surprised to see how many of those attending the MoveOn screening had actually taken part in OWS actions near her home – wow, that’s encouraging! Not much media coverage of those events, though…which leads us to the next post…
Ratings and the Yellow Journalism of Fox News (Parts 1 and 2)
In Part 1, Nomad shows the business model of Fox News and how Rupert Murdoch has used his influence to manipulate politicians, businesspeople and, of course, the public. Murdoch’s modus operandi includes compulsive lying, cover-ups, hush money, bribery, and invasion of privacy. Let’s not forget inciting violence, and did I mention raising lying to an art form? No wonder regular Fox News viewers actually know less about current events than those who watch no news programs at all. Until recently, Murdoch’s many connections to politicians and police have allowed him to avoid any consequences for his illegal activities. At the end of this post and in Part 2, Nomad explores the incestuous relationship between Rupert Murdoch and the TV ratings apparatus. It appears that there is a mechanism which automatically sets cable TVs to start up with Fox News – wow, that is ultra-slimy! Also, apparently the boxes that are the basis of the Nielsen TV rating system are made by a company with – wait for it – close ties to Murdoch. If Fox News has been inflating its ratings, then this is nothing short of corporate fraud. (Of course, Murdoch has gotten away with that before, due to his close ties and likely bribes of politicians.) Nomad also explores the roots of lying and sensationalism to manipulate public opinion into support of wars and to portray progressives and socialists in a negative light. Well done as always, Nomad! This video seems to go with your post.
BBT adds: While it will never be enough, I hope that Milly Dowler’s family will find some solace in the fact that the scandal over News of the World’s actions after Milly’s murder was the catalyst leading to an investigation of the Murdoch empire’s disgustingly corrupt, so-called “journalism.”
Just a few comments and links (sorry, I rarely miss reading the comments but couldn’t keep up lately):
Quiet1: LOL, I read your headline, and my brain immediately supplied: Go Froth, and conjure! : )
BfromC: I have a dream. . .
That, come November, the U.S. voting public will have completely awakened, realize that things are improving, that Obama has their best interests at heart, that today's Tea-Party Tainted Republicans are total wackjobs that don't even deserve the votes of lifetime Republicans, that the thousands of nasty ads against Obama (paid for by the Koch brothers and friends) are a bunch of crap, that many billionaires will have wasted quite a sum of money in their anit-Obama efforts, and that Barack Obama will win re-election by a sizable margin.
I have a dream . . . that seems like it just might come true. Share the dream. I'm in. Are You?
I have to give Nomad a standing O for this on Rom[o]ney: “You could almost hear the gasp of a million CEOs and the moan and groan of a thousand Republican Party elites. In that one sentence he confirmed the Right Wing’s darkest suspicions about this candidate. Namely, he is not committed to their agenda after all. Good God, he might even be a moderate, which is next door to a liberal, which is just around the corner from a socialist which is on the same street as a Communist!”
HonestyinGov found this on Wonkette (where else?): Failed Republican Windbag Karen Handel Self-Aborts from Komen.
Alwaysthink linked to another nexcellent post at margaretandhelen.
Excellent commentary by Chris Hayes on Clint Eastwood’s “It’s Half-time in America” ad.
Cheeriogirl gave us this to cheer about on the contraceptive controversy.
Mmboucher pointed out these Santorum quotes.
Sunnyjane linked to this excellent video of Ellen DeGeneris saying what she stands for. Watch to the end.

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Ratings and The Yellow Journalism of Fox News 2/2

by Nomad
In the first part of this two-part series, we examined the intricate and intimidating Murdoch connections and how watching Fox News apparently makes you more ignorant than watching no news at all.

Roger Ailes, President of Fox News
Big-Time Cheating
In spite of the near continual boasting at Fox News, some (real) reporters have dared to question the Fox News ratings. Their suspicions were aroused by the simple fact that the numbers made little sense. Was it actually plausible?
How is it, they wonder, that Fox News can be so consistently in the lead despite their obvious niche programming focus on a narrow segment of the viewing audience. The decidedly right-of-center bias of Fox News corresponds to a rather small portion of the national electorate. Republican favorability has been hovering in the mid-twenties for years. So how does this negligible slice of the market translate into such a disproportionate ratings advantage?
It’s a very good question. Perhaps the answer can be found in the complex (downright incestuous) business relationship between Nielsen Media Research, which collects the ratings information and Murdoch.
It has recently been discovered that the Wegener Corporation, the manufacturer of the set-top devices that Nielsen uses, has a long association with Rupert Murdoch and the News Corporation, the parent of Fox News. Wegener was founded by the former management of Scientific-Atlanta, a producer of set-top boxes for cable access and other purposes.
One of the other products in Scientific-Atlanta’s line was a device used by Gemstar to provide television program listings to cable operators and their subscribers. Gemstar was an affiliate of TV Guide, which in turn was owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. So the executives who were responsible for developing and manufacturing Murdoch’s equipment for Gemstar became the principles of the company providing Nielsen with their ratings collection devices. And around that same time Fox News dropped their objections to the new People Meter service.
Incidentally, Scientific-Atlanta and Newt Gingrich, a former Fox News employee, had a colorful history together. Both Senator Sam Nunn and Representative Newt Gingrich nurtured partnerships between Atlanta's research universities, military concerns, political ties, and business outlets. Gingrich described Scientific Atlanta as "a model of the spirit of invention and discovery" in a series of university lectures he gave and which eventually got him in hot water with The House Ethics Committee.

(That interesting story will have to be saved for a different post, however.)

“The bottom line on this is there may be some big-time cheating going on in the ratings system, and we hope the feds will investigate. Any fraud in the television rating system affects all Americans.”
We share his heart-felt desire that the Feds investigate this problem. We hope they investigate all the news channels, but let's just start with Fox.
On the other hand, so what? So what if Murdoch, News Corporation and Fox News want to play games with the numbers. It allows them to boast but then that’s what bullies do. It’s all unethical, yes. It’s a pack of lies, yes, that’s true. But, outside of defaulting on its claim of being a trusted news source, is it a crime?
Well, perhaps. 
The ratings are not only used to determine what to charge advertisers, they are also used in annual shareholder reports. False claims would be giving an unrealistic, deceptive picture of the company, amounting to fraud. According to News Corp’s 2011 annual report:
At FOX News, for example, Roger Ailes and his team have built television’s undisputed news leader – not just in cable network news, but in all television news. Later this calendar year, FOX News will celebrate its fifteenth anniversary, and I couldn’t be more pleased with its success. Over at the FOX Business Network our ratings are improving – and at certain times of the day we’re head to head with CNBC, and sometimes beating them.
When back in July 2002 then-president George W. Bush signed the Corporate Corruption Bill- which was supposed to make inflated claims to shareholders illegalhe told reporters:
This law says to every dishonest corporate leader: you will be exposed and punished; the era of low standards and false profits is over; no boardroom in America is above or beyond the law.

This law says to shareholders that the financial information you receive from a company will be true and reliable, for those who deliberately sign their names to deception will be punished
Still, given all we have seen from that pair, you can’t help wondering if Rupert Murdoch was standing over his shoulder when Bush was signing the bill.

Sinclair and the Monopoly of Self-Expression
Actually, there’s nothing all that new about the decline of the news media. Its the scale involved and the damage that this kind of yellow journalism causes that puts Murdoch in a league of his own.
The phrase “yellow journalism” was once attached to the media mogul William Randolph Hearst, a man that Rupert Murdoch in many ways resembles. For example, Hearst used his media power to promote the Spanish-American war, following the mysterious sinking of the battleship Maine. Murdoch banged the drums for the invasion of Iraq following the mysterious 9-11 attacks. And Murdoch with a vast media empire banged those war drums so incessantly that they managed to drown out the more prudent voices of restraint.
A year-long study by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) reported that Americans who relied on the Fox News Channel for their coverage of the Iraq war were the most likely to believe misinformation about the war, whatever their political affiliation may be. Those mistaken facts, the study found, increased viewers' support for the war.
According to Congressional Research Service, the approximate cost of the Spanish- American War in adjusted figures : $9,034 million and that lasted one year. Iraq invasion and occupation? $784 billion and eight years. 
As a term, “Yellow journalism” was coined during the epic battle between newspapermen, Joseph Pulitzer and Hearst. It was generally used to describe the kind of sensational - possibly imagined- story that was designed to attract readers regardless of the ethical questions. Today it is more widely used to refer to unprofessional or unethical reporting. One of Hearst harshest critiques came from the same author who had previously described the horrific conditions in the meat packing industry at that time. 

Upton Sinclair
Back in 1919, author Upton Sinclair wrote The Brass Check: A Study of American Journalism, an expose which revealed the dangers of media monopolies. He criticized ultra-conservative papers, especially the Hearst and AP, which he claimed, conspired against the working class for the sake of their narrow political or business interests. 

He charged employees of Hearst newspapers with being “willing by deliberate and shameful lies, made out of whole cloth, to stir nations to enmity and drive them to murderous war." For newspaper writers, the word “socialism” was forbidden or, if mentioned, could never be portrayed in a positive light.

Sinclair’s words sound hauntingly true today.He wrote: 
Every day the chasm between the classes in America grows wider; every day the class struggle grows more intense. Both sides become more conscious, more determined--and so the dishonesty of American Journalism becomes more deliberate, more systematic. And what is to be done? It must be evident to any sensible man that the conditions portrayed in this book are intolerable. Mankind will not consent to be lied to indefinitely.
Today the problem is much the same.
Aggressive and uncalled-for brutality by police goes largely unreported (at least, until the journalists themselves become victims) for the sake of trivial and largely manufactured news about celebrities. The reporting on the Occupy movement was nothing short of an indictment of the mainstream media which did all in their power to ignore or to minimize its legitimacy. As far as Fox News, their slanders about the president or his family are practically a daily ritual. All without any regard for accuracy. 
We see so-called journalists like James O’Keefe or  Andy Breitbart making sensational and false claims without the slightest twinge of conscience. And when their claims are proven incorrect or highly exaggerated, they have already moved on to the next commotion. Hysterical Lies about rapist protesters (totally fabricated).  The lies on Fox News are too numerous to list and there is apparently no means of holding any of them to account. They are free to slander and libel at will. 
The difference is that today the world's resources are in the hands of a class, and this class has a monopoly of self-expression.
Sinclair also gave this warning if the trends continue and it is a warning that applies as much today.
I personally am not calling for violent revolution; I still hope for the survival of the American system of government. But I point out to the owners and managers of our great capitalist news-organs the peril in which they place themselves, by their system of organized lying about the radical movement. It is not only the fury of resentment they awaken in the hearts of class-conscious workingmen and women; it is the condition of unstable equilibrium which they set up in society, by the mass of truth they suppress.
If newspapers are in now decline and journalists on both sides of the political spectrum are held in low-esteem by so many, then they have only themselves to blame. They have chosen profit over all else. 
As soon as journalism became a commodity to trade, then truth itself was up for sale and ratings became simply the measure of what anyone would have to pay to own it .
___________________
PostScript:
Media Matters  has lately become a Fox News target,  And I've been wondering what exactly it's all been about. Today I found it. MM has a book coming out which promises to be close scrutiny of the goings-on over at Murdoch's news channel. 
From tracing the career of Fox News founder Roger Ailes as he learned to manipulate racial politics while working on the presidential campaigns of Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush, to visiting a cruise ship in the middle of the Mediterranean where a senior Fox News executive admitted to telling Fox News viewers that Barack Obama was a socialist even though he did not believe the charge to be true, The Fox Effect dismantles once and for all the notion that there’s any genuine meaning behind the network’s “fair & balanced” slogan.