Running Off the Rails...

I've listened to preachers
I've listened to fools
I've watched all the dropouts
Who make their own rules
One person conditioned to rule and control
The media sells it and you live the role

Photo courtesy of here and the lyrics are from Ozzy Osborne's "Crazy Train".


Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) appeared on Glenn Beck's show this afternoon in what can only be described as a complete train-wreck.

Massa has made news as of late due to his announcement that he is resigning his Congressional Seat due to intense pressure from the White House surrounding his potential vote for the health care legislation. The White House has denied this claim and shortly after Massa made this claim, Glenn Beck jumped at the chance to let Massa tell exactly how the White House had pressured him to resign.

This situation got even more complicated earlier today when it was revealed that Massa was being investigated for inappropriately groping male staffers.

Glenn Beck was quite intrigued by the "White House forcing out a Congressman" angle of the story and desperately tried to get Massa to give him all the juicy details. Massa had nothing to offer aside from the "shocking" revelation that Washington is a town that has fallen victim to partisanship.

Beck set up the segment saying that he didn't know who this guy was or if he was a bad guy, but that the allegations of being forced out of office made this an interesting story. After a five-minute build-up, Beck introduced Massa and the first words out of Massa's mouth were:

"Can I just start off with something? I wasn't forced out, I forced myself out. I failed. I didn't live up to my own codes. I own this."

Wow, glad that was settled so quickly! Not only that, but Massa continued on and admitted that he did grope a male staffer and "tickled him until he couldn't breath". Beck was clearly taken aback from the very beginning and it only got crazier from there. Watch the whole intro and the first segment:



Picture of x-ray's, tickle fights, a reversal of position and that is all within the first segement of this program. It actually looks like Beck is the sane one in these clips. Massa would go on to describe an encounter that he had with a naked Rahm Emanuel in the House of Representative's communal shower. From the Huffington Post:

"I was in my first two months," he said. "I was in a battle about the budget, Rahm was angry with me. He poked his finger in my chest while we were in the shower. I went through it on the radio show. Not only did it happen, I will never forget it. Rahm Emanuel doesn't like me. I get it."

Despite all of this, Beck continued to plead with Massa to tell the public something new about how he was forced out of office by the White House, but Massa continued to give him absolutely nothing:



This all led Beck to apologize to his viewers for "wasting their time" with the interview. Just watch Beck's face during this last segment as he realizes that he has successfully booked someone on his show who is spouting off something crazier than him:



This was truly a crazy interview, one that Beck certainly did not see playing out as it did. Former Rep. Massa showed signs of dealing with some intense pressures that are obviously affecting him and led to his being all over the place during this hour of television. I think it can be surmised that the White House probably didn't force him from his job and that there is more that has yet to have been discovered regarding the investigation into Massa's "groping" of his staffers. Massa even stated that there are "probably text messages" out there that could be wrongly perceived.

Beck expected Massa to come on and spill the beans about how the White House is full of unprecedented corruption and how they threw their weight around, forcing Massa to resign. What became clear to Beck from very early on was that his plan backfired in a big way. Massa is obviously having some problems in his life right now and his behavior in this interview exemplified why it was probably a mistake for Beck to try and embrace him politically.

O'Reilly's Unedited Interview With Stewart Released

For the first time in four years, Bill O'Reilly had Jon Stewart on The O'Reilly Factor this past week. I watched the interview as it appeared on the program and found it to be kind of dull. They would both make some uneasy jokes about each other, Stewart would get in some zingers about Bill and Fox, there would be some more funny comments, etc. It was somewhat entertaining, but nothing to write home about.

This was apparently what the producers at the O'Reilly Factor wanted to convey as is evidenced by the full, unedited interview that has since been released (h/t Dave Neiwert). The clips below are compiled by Crooks and Liars to show some extended segments that were edited out of the interview that originally aired on Fox. Stewart really takes it to Fox with some on-point criticisms of the network and it is far better than anything that O'Reilly actually put on the air:



Stewart nails Fox's behavior on several issues and when O'Reilly tries to defend the network, Stewart dismisses him with a "please" and a hand-wave. Fox's behavior as a so-called "news" organization is so obvious and blatant at this point, that it seems ridiculous for O'Reilly to try and put together any kind of defense.

I'll take these unedited clips over what aired any day.

Glenn Beck Interviews Sarah Palin

Glenn Beck is back in 2010 for another year of crazy and he devoted an entire hour of his program to interviewing former Governor of Alaska and new Fox News Contributor Sarah Palin. It's an hour of paranoia, self-victimization, and rehashing everything that you have known about these two figures since 2008. Below is the full interview in various segments, but I also wanted to share how Palin prepared for this interview (according to Beck) to demonstrate Palin's mindset. Listen to this clip from Beck's radio program as he describes what happened pre-interview.



Here is the interview:



















and of course, Jon Stewart had a fun take on this interview as well:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Crazy Like a Contributor
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

A Continued Breath of Fresh Air

Last night Rachel Maddow showed everyone, yet again, how the media should behave.

This time, Rachel interviewed Richard Cohn of the International Healing Foundation. Cohn says that he is an ex-homosexual who is now working to help council other gay members of society out of their feelings and into heterosexuality.

Maddow was her usual polite self, letting the guest make his points, but used preparation, facts, and uncomfortably probing questions to destroy Mr. Cohn. This is precisely how the media should operate. Journalists should ask tough questions without worrying weather the guest likes them, call the guest on blatant lies and use facts to challenge the guest when they simply make things up.

Here is Maddow's full interview of Cohn. It is a thing of beauty and it is an understatement to say that we need more of this in order to move society forward.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Lou Dobbs Continues his Post-CNN Media Tour

Lou Dobbs, freshly departed from his gig at CNN, stopped by The Daily Show last night. Jon Stewart extended the segment into a three-part conversation that is posted at The Daily Show's website and also right here:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 3
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

I thought Stewart was pretty good in this conversation, but it wasn't his best. The conversation stayed very down to Earth and Stewart was able to challenge Dobbs on a few key points, but Stewart didn't touch on Dobbs' controversial stance on "illegal" immigration or on his recent birther comments. Stewart also allowed Dobbs to paint President Obama as a "far left" President which, in turn, framed Dobbs as being a centrist. Then again, Stewart is just the host of a satirical comedy show right?

One of the more important points that Stewart did bring up, which I believe is both revealing and central to this conversation, is the past silence of those who are suddenly criticizing the so-called destruction of our freedoms by the government. I have stated this in the past, but it is quite clear that during the last eight years, the tea-partiers and 9/12'ers were totally silent on these issues. It is only now, when there is a black Democratic President in the White House, when there is sudden outrage from the right and being adopted as a viable business strategy by a major "news" corporation.

If you want to take a look at a really interesting interview of Dobbs and a subsequent discussion, I point you to this interview that was conducted by Democracy Now! hosts Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez in December of 2007. Dobbs is confronted and forced to try and explain apparent inaccuracies that he stated on his broadcast. I will post some of the transcript below, but I highly recommend you follow that link and watch the entire conversation.

AMY GOODMAN: So, Lou, you said a third of the prison population are illegal aliens.

LOU DOBBS: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: The fact is, it’s something like 6% of prisoners in this country are non-citizens, not even illegal, just non-citizens.

LOU DOBBS: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: And then a percentage of that would not be documented.

LOU DOBBS: Well, it’s actually—I think it’s 26% in federal prison.

AMY GOODMAN: But you said of all prisoners.

LOU DOBBS: I said about—yes, but I—and I misspoke, without question. I was referring to federal prisoners.

AMY GOODMAN: But you didn’t say that, and so it leaves people with the impression—

LOU DOBBS: Well, I didn’t, but then I just explained it to you.

AMY GOODMAN: But you have a very large audience on CNN.

LOU DOBBS: I have a very large audience and a very bright audience.

AMY GOODMAN: And you told them that a third of the population of this country are illegal immigrants. 6% , which is under the population of immigrants—

LOU DOBBS: 6% , right.

AMY GOODMAN: —in this country, of prisoners—

LOU DOBBS: In state prisons.

AMY GOODMAN: —are immigrants.

LOU DOBBS: In state prisons. In state prisons.

AMY GOODMAN: No, 6% overall are immigrants. You said 30% are illegal.

LOU DOBBS: Well, I think we’ve established—we could sit here and say this all day, Amy. The fact is, the number is 26% in federal prisons. That’s what I was referring to. I did not—I misspoke when I said “prisons.” I was referring to the federal prisons, because that’s the federal crime: immigration. And that—

AMY GOODMAN: Have you made a correction on your show to say that 30% of—?

LOU DOBBS: I’m sure we have. We’ve reported—absolutely.

AMY GOODMAN: We didn’t see it.

[...]

AMY GOODMAN: Another guest that you’ve had on the show—now, this is a very important point, and this is one that you would agree that you’ve covered, and that is Arizona—this is very important—the Protect Arizona Now referendum. In late 2004, it was revealed that the new head of the national advisory board to Protect Arizona Now, an anti-immigration organization, was a longtime white supremacist who was also an editorial advisor to the racist Council of Conservative Citizens. Although Virginia Abernethy’s controversial selection was reported prominently in virtually every Arizona paper, and despite the fact that Lou Dobbs heavily cover the anti-immigration referendum that Protect Arizona Now was advocating, you never mentioned the affair at all, her controversial selection as head of this group.

LOU DOBBS: And she was featured in how many reports?

AMY GOODMAN: The point is, you covered Protect Arizona Now extensively, and this is certainly significant, when it turns out that the head of the board of Protect Arizona Now is—

LOU DOBBS: And when was the last time she was on the show?

AMY GOODMAN: No, the important point is, you didn’t report the news of this very controversial—

LOU DOBBS: Is it possible—

AMY GOODMAN: —racist woman who headed Protect Arizona Now, which was virtually in every Arizona paper. The question is—

LOU DOBBS: Concurrent with our reporting?

AMY GOODMAN: —what you report and what you don’t.

LOU DOBBS: Concurrent with our reporting?

AMY GOODMAN: Of course. This is in 2004. The point is, what you report, Lou, and what you don’t report.

LOU DOBBS: Well, you know, Amy, I don’t know what to tell you, because, you know, based on your focus here today, you have focused on probably three or four reports, as best I can figure, out of more than five years of reporting on the issue. If that smacks at all to you of reasonable proportionate journalism on your part, I mean, God bless you. If that’s what you believe, God bless you. But I think you’re coming from an ideological position that has just absolutely skewed that perception and that perspective.

Palin's Interview with Barbara Walters

As it appears many do, I find Sarah Palin's widespread appeal to Conservatives very interesting. Every time she gives an interview, it is clear that to some, the accuracy of her claims have no bearing on her popularity. Even when she lies through her teeth.

The Huffington Post has compiled "18 of the Biggest Falsehoods" in Palin's new book and the Associated Press also did a fact check of the book. The New York Times summarizes:

The A.P. suggests that history and Ms. Palin diverge on a number of points, adding that her recollection of the awarding of lucrative natural gas contracts seems at odds with what happened, that her campaign financing included its share of high rollers in spite of her suggestion to the contrary, and that her warm feelings toward the Exxon Valdez settlement are a recent development. The A.P. knocks her for persistent historical revisionism and tartly concludes, “‘Going Rogue’ has all the characteristics of a precampaign manifesto, the requisite autobiography of the future candidate.”

Frankly, it should not a surprise to anyone that Palin has a rocky relationship with the truth, but what is noteworthy is her continued support despite her blatant contradictions that are exposed so publicly and so thoroughly.

Here is her most recent interview with Barbara Walters:





Watch her response at about 6:22 in the second video. Does anyone actually believe that Levi has "nothing" on her?

Murdoch Defends Glenn Beck's Comments that President Obama is a 'Racist'

Blogging has been a little sparse as of late due to some research that has consumed some of my time but this item was pretty revealing.

I know it can be hard to keep all the antics of Glenn Beck straight in your mind, but think back to the summer when Beck stated that President Obama was a "racist" and that he had a "deep seated hatred for white people".

Remember that?

Well, media mogul and creator of Fox News has now come out in an interview and stated that while Beck probably shouldn't have said it, he was right to call Obama a racist:



If you didn't want to watch the entire video, here is the quote:

Speers: Glenn Beck who you mentioned has called Barack Obama a racist, and he helped organize a protest against him and others on Fox have likened him (Obama) to Stalin is that defensible?

Murdoch: No, no, no, not Stalin, I don't think, ah, not one of our people.

On the racist thing, that caused a (unintelligible). But he (Obama) did make a very racist comment. Ahhh -- about, you know, blacks and whites and so on, and which he said in his campaign he would be completely above. And um, that was something which perhaps shouldn't have been said about the President, but if you actually assess what he was talking about, he was right.

Dave Neiwert over at Crooks and Liars has a good breakdown analyzing the "who said what and when" in this entry. Here is a clip:

Now, what exactly was it that Obama said that brought Beck to this conclusion -- and which Murdoch claims was a "racist" thing for him to say? Well, he was talking about the Henry Louis Gates arrest:

"Now, I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts what role race played in that, but I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry. Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. And that's just a fact.

As you know, Lynn, when I was in the state legislature in Illinois we worked on a racial profiling bill because there was indisputable evidence that blacks and hispanics were being stopped disproportionately. And that is a sign, an example of how, you know, race remains a factor in this society. That doesn't lessen the incredible progress that has been made. I am standing here as testimony to the progress that's been made. And yet, the fact of the matter is that, you know, this still haunts us. And even when there are honest misunderstandings, the fact that blacks and hispanics are picked up more frequently and often time for no cause cast suspicion even when there is good cause, and that's why I think the more that we're working with local law enforcement to improve policing techniques so that we're eliminating potential bias, the safer everybody's going to be."

And this was racist exactly how?

I suppose if you redefined "racism" to include "bringing up historically and factually accurate information about racist behavior of white people", then I suppose you could say that. I don't think we're there yet, but Rupert Murdoch is obviously working on it.

Interview with Dr. Brad Wenstrup, 2009 Republican Candidate for Mayor of Cincinnati

Dr. Brad Wenstrup, a lifetime resident of Cincinnati, is the 2009 Republican candidate for Mayor of Cincinnati. Wenstrup is a member of the U.S. Army Reserve and ran his own medical practice in downtown Cincinnati from 1986 to 2001. The Cincinnati Beacon reached out to the Wenstrup campaign on numerous occasions in attempts to get responses to our questions. Below is the outcome of our efforts:

CB: You suggest revitalizing neighborhoods with a model like between 3CDC and Over-the-Rhine. 3CDC received public subsidies to purchase abandoned buildings. How can this model work in the neighborhoods? Do you support more subsidies for private corporations to purchase buildings?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: You say the Environmental Justice Ordinance kills jobs. Can you point to one job that has been "killed" since the very recent implementation of this ordinance?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: What is one example by which a mayor can specifically stimulate job growth for minority-owned and women-owned businesses?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: What aspect of the streetcar's funding structure is "wasteful"? Do you deny that the streetcar brings economic development? If so, on what basis? If not, then why not support the plan?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: Is there a relationship between human service funding and crime? What role should human service funding play during tough budgetary scenarios?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: You call "spraygrounds" more modern than swimming pools. How are disadvantaged children supposed to learn how to swim?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: You say you support no cuts to the "frontline" in police and fire. What about administration? How many cuts can you support to bloated administrative costs with fire and police? How quickly will you implement these cuts?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: If elected, would you be willing to meet with online activists in designing a more transparent interface for tracking City Hall actions?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: You say you want to be engaged as mayor, attending public comment sessions. Will you require councilmembers to be attentive, or is it acceptable to use Twitter in open council chambers?


BW: (No response provided)


CB: If you went to a different community council once a week, you'd only see each community once a year. Isn't "Mayor's Night In" a more effective strategy to hear from concerned voters?


BW: (No response provided)


This interview is cross posted here.

Above photo is courtesy of here.