Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Fox News Says Tea Parties are Not Funded by the Right-Wing While Promoting Newt Gingrich's Think-Tank
During today's Fox News coverage of the tea parties, host Gretchen Carlson attempted to push back against those who are pointing out that the tea parties are being funded by corporate lobbyists. Carlson interviews three organizers of a tea party this morning and asks them to respond to those who say that the protests are a "right-wing conspiracy". The organizers deny it, but at the same time, the chyron that is scrolling at the bottom of the screen directs those who wish to learn more about the Bergen County tea party to go to the Americans Solutions for Winning the Future. This organization happens to be Newt Gingrich's corporate-funded think tank. Watch the video:
More on the Tax Day Tea Parties
Domenico Montanaro of MSNBC:
But let’s be clear about one thing: These tea parties are hardly non-partisan events. While there’s certainly a grassroots component here, these parties have been co-opted by a major America political party (the RNC's Web site allows for creating send-a-tea-bag post cards to Dem leaders) and an entire cable news channel (which has been promoting the events). The main Web site for the events today, Tax Day Tea Party, is funded by conservative groups, and a public records search shows it's registered to a conservative techie, Allen B. Fuller, who used to be a legislative correspondent for GOP Sen. Richard Shelby and who touts creating Web sites for Republican elected officials. Also reportedly involved in today’s protest events are FreedomWorks, a conservative group founded by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, and Americans for Prosperity.
Glenn Reynolds disagrees in the Wall Street Journal:
So who's behind the Tax Day tea parties? Ordinary folks who are using the power of the Internet to organize.
[...]
The movement grew so fast that some bloggers at the Playboy Web site -- apparently unaware that we've entered the 21st century -- suggested that some secret organization must be behind all of this. But, in fact, today's technology means you don't need an organization, secret or otherwise, to get organized. After considerable ridicule, the claim was withdrawn, but that hasn't stopped other media outlets from echoing it.
"Bloggers at the Playboy Web site" Reynolds says. As if the promotion by Fox News and the funding by corporate lobbyists are just a figment of the imagination of bloggers on Playboy's website. Nice try Glenn.
So we have those like Reynolds who still continue to claim that these protests are not being organized by organizations who are funded by corporate lobbyists, while at the same time these very same organizations are admitting that they are helping to organize these events. From the Freedom Works website:
Thank you for joining the massive movement of citizens that are opposed to the trillions of dollars in federal spending and the bailouts of Wall Street and failed businesses. With your help, we have been able to organize hundreds of Taxpayer Tea Parties across the country, from Santa Barbara, California to Amarillo, Texas, and all the way to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Together, as one united force for liberty, we can take our country back!
Adam Brandon of Freedom Works says that they are helping coordinate these events much like MoveOn.org helps to coordinate similar events:
"If you look at MoveOn's model...if you consider that AstroTurfing, I'd probably have to say that we're AstroTurfing," Brandon told me. But if critics assume the organization is top-down, he said, "they're gonna underestimate us."
but as Digby has pointed out, there is quite the difference between the two organizations. Here is how MoveOn does business:
MoveOn uses e-mail as its main conduit for communicating with members, sending action alerts at least once a week.
The MoveOn.org web site also uses multi-media, including videos, audio downloads, and images. In addition to communicating via the Internet, MoveOn advertises using traditional print and broadcast media, as well as billboards, bus signs, and bumper stickers, digital versions of which are downloadable from its web site. It also contains an area called the "Action Forum", which functions much like a traditional electronic discussion group. The Action Forums act as a grassroots organization allowing members to propose priorities and strategies.
Through this grassroots methodology, MoveOn collaborates with groups like Meetup.com in organizing street demonstrations, bake sales, house parties, and other opportunities for people to meet personally and act collectively in their own communities.
Some of its core principles are that it is not dependent on foundation money and that it has the ability to use 'hard money' – as opposed to grants and tax-deductible contributions – which enables them to be partisan, contribute to political campaigns, and exercise clout in the political process.
and here is how Freedom Works does business:
FreedomWorks claims a membership of over 360,000 and a multi-tentacled legal structure that includes a 501 c(3), a 501 c(4), a 527, a federal PAC, and various state PACs. John Stauber, co-author of Banana Republicans: How The Right Wing is Turning America into a One-Party State, recently pointed out that that according to internal documents leaked to the Washington Post in January 2000, the bulk of Citizens for a Sound Economy's revenues ($15.5 million in 1998) came not from its members, but from contributions of $250,000 and up from large corporations, including Allied Signal, Archer Daniels Midland, DaimlerChrysler, Emerson Electric Company, Enron, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, Philip Morris and U.S. West (now Qwest).
While the differences in these organizations are clear, Andrew Sullivan continues to maintain that the goals of these tea party protests are anything but clear:
But it seems odd to describe this as anything but a first stab at creating opposition to the Obama administration's spending plans, manned by people who made no serious objections to George W. Bush's. The tea-parties are as post-partisan as Reynolds, one of the most relentlessly partisan bloggers on the web. When you see them holding up effigies of Bush, who was, unlike Obama, supposed to be the fiscal conservative, let me know.
But the substantive critique must remain the primary one. Protesting government spending is meaningless unless you say what you'd cut.
If you favor no bailouts, then say so. If you want to see the banking system collapse, then say so. If you think the recession demands no fiscal stimulus, then say so. If you favor big cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, social security and defense, then say so. I keep waiting for Reynolds to tell us what these protests are for; and he can only spin what they they are against.
All protests against spending that do not tell us how to reduce it are fatuous pieces of theater, not constructive acts of politics. And until the right is able to make a constructive and specific argument about how they intend to reduce spending and debt and borrowing, they deserve to be dismissed as performance artists in a desperate search for coherence in an age that has left them bewilderingly behind.
I think Sullivan's points are quite valid and deserve mentioning when we are engaged in discussion surrounding these protests.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Is Bagram the New Guantanamo?
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Astroturf Tea Parties
As many of you have probably read by now, there are protests scheduled in various cities around the United States for April 15. These "tea-parties" were first conceived after CNBC host Rick Santelli floated the idea in his now infamous on-air rant. Since then people have gathered in cities across America to protest against the government bailouts, taxation, spending, and large deficits, supposedly in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party where colonists were protesting taxation without representation.
Though many of these protests claim to hold no party affiliation, there has been a common theme of railing specifically against the Obama Administration's policies with some participants echoing some of the ugly sentiments that we saw during the campaign. While it is clear that people are very angry at the Obama Administration, it is not always clear why or what alternatives are being suggested at these tea-parties. Andrew Sullivan explains:
It's a protest of the bank bailouts orchestrated by Bush and now Obama. But surely these tea-partiers understand what would happen if we didn't bail the banks out. Are they advocating letting major banks fail? Or are they advocating a Krugman-style government take-over? No idea.
...
It's a protest against tax hikes. But there have barely been any! Are they arguing that the planned return to Clinton era marginal rates is an outrage worthy of the colonists ... only months after an election in which the winning candidate ran on exactly that platform?
...
It's a protest against government debt. Yay! I will leave aside the somewhat awkward fact that Fox News and Pajamas Media barely covered the massive debt racked up by the Republicans during a period of economic growth.
Don't get me wrong, there are some people who are also angry at the Republicans for getting us into this economic mess, but as Fox News has entered the scene to actively promote these acts that stem from supposed populist anger, the situation gets more complicated and seems a bit, well...contrived.
Fox News is dispatching their anchors all around the country in order to "cover" these tea party protests and for weeks now, have gone beyond just covering the story and engaged in actively embracing and promoting these events:
In fact, yesterday Fox News host Stuart Varney even exclaimed: “It’s now my great duty to promote the tea parties. Here we go!”.
Not only is Fox News promoting these tea parties, but corporate donors are helping to fund the demonstrations. From ThinkProgress:
...the principle organizers of the local events are actually the lobbyist-run think tanks Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works. The two groups are heavily
staffed and well funded, and are providing all the logistical and public relations work necessary for planning coast-to-coast protests:
– Freedom Works staffers coordinate conference calls among protesters, contacting conservative activists to give them “sign ideas, sample press releases, and a map of events around the country.”
– Freedom Works staffers apparently moved to “take over” the planning of local events in Florida.
– Freedom Works provides how-to guides for delivering a “clear message” to the public and media.
– Freedom Works has several domain addresses — some of them made to look like they were set up by amateurs — to promote the protests.
– Americans for Prosperity is writing press releases and planning the events in New Jersey, Arizona, New Hampshire, Missouri, Kansas, and several other states.
Freedom Works is an organization run by registered lobbyist and former Republican Majority Leader, Dick Armey and Americans for Prosperity is run by Tim Phillips, Ralph Reed's former lobbying partner. Is there any doubt that these organizations are actively involved in planning these "grassroots" uprisings? From the Freedom Works website:
Thank you for joining the massive movement of citizens that are opposed to the trillions of dollars in federal spending and the bailouts of Wall Street and failed businesses. With your help, we have been able to organize hundreds of Taxpayer Tea Parties across the country, from Santa Barbara, California to Amarillo, Texas, and all the way to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Together, as one united force for liberty, we can take our country back!
and where does the "donate" button link to if you are interested in donating to causes like the tea-party:
Your contribution to the FreedomWorks Foundation will make a real difference
in the fight for limited government and economic freedom. Thank you. I look
forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Matt Kibbe
President and
CEO
As Jane Hamsher points out, Matt Kibbe was behind the attempt to keep Ralph Nader off of the ballot in the state of Oregon in 2004 which led to a complaint with the FEC for illegal collusion with the GOP.
So we have a supposed "grassroots" movement of people who are opposed to taxation, deficits, bailouts, and a host of other issues, who are having tea parties that are being promoted by Fox News (whose stated mission is to be the voice of opposition to this Administration) and funded by corporate lobbyists. As Paul Krugman and others have pointed out, this means that this movement is not a spontaneous grassroots uprising of the people, but an astroturf movement.
Here is an exchange that happened on Fox Business Network recently where a Think Progress editor called out Fox for promoting these tea parties. The host of the program says that there is a "big difference" in covering something and promoting something, but check out the what the host says coming out of the segment:
Thank you, panel. Excellent job. Okay. Why it’s time to party like it’s 1773. Next.
[…]
What is right though is the growing chorus of Americans that want their country and their liberties back. Anti-tax tea parties will happen all over the country Wednesday, carrying on in the American spirit that will send a message to Washington and Wall Street. … Remember, you have a right to voice your opinion and fight back.
the video:
Monday, April 13, 2009
The Role of the News Anchor
Friday, April 10, 2009
Tea-parties or Tea-tantrums?
As a fiscal conservative who actually believed in those principles when the Republicans were in power, I guess I should be happy at this phenomenon. And I would be if it had any intellectual honesty, any positive proposals, and any recognizable point. What it looks like to me is some kind of amorphous, generalized rage on the part of those who were used to running the country and now don't feel part of the culture at all. But the only word for that is: tantrum.
These are not tea-parties. They are tea-tantrums. And the adolescent, unserious hysteria is a function not of a movement regrouping and refinding itself. It's a function of a movement's intellectual collapse and a party's fast-accelerating nervous breakdown.
17 Socialists and Dousing the Public with Gasoline
Recently, Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama stated that he has a list of 17 members of Congress who he believes are socialists. He would not disclose names on this list except for Rep. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who openly identifies with the Democratic Socialist Party as it exists in Scandinavia. From the Birmingham News:
Interviewed in Washington, Sanders' spokesman Will Wiquist said the senator is an independent who identifies with the Democratic Socialist Party as it is in Scandinavia, where government achievements include high education and childhood health rates and little poverty or crime. It is not related to the Socialist Party.
"It's a different brand of socialism than the congressman is probably thinking of," Wiquist said. Wiquist said there are no other socialists in Congress. He said his boss is the only member who identifies as such.
Apparently, Rep. Michelle Bachman's recent call for the media to investigate whether her colleagues were "pro-America or Anti-America" resonated with Bachus.
Glenn Beck has also resurrected his brand of crazy from the last few weeks. On yesterday's show, he compared Obama's first three months in office to dousing Americans with gasoline and setting them on fire. He demonstrated this, by pouring fake gasoline on an actor and lighting a match in his vicinity: