First and foremost, I apologize for the light posting recently. I have been traveling and these travels have resulted in some interesting and very exciting opportunities which I will announce in an upcoming post.
With that being said, and to start off the week on a light note, Tina Fey returned to Saturday Night Live this past weekend and reprised her role as Sarah Palin. It gave me several laughs and I thought I would pass it on to all of you:
Monday, April 12, 2010
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Maddow: "Let Them Eat Fake"
Rachel Maddow does another bang-up job last week in discussing fake Republican outrage over issues that are not exactly rooted in fact.
From the so-called ACORN pimp scandel, to President Obama's recess appointments, to civilian trials for terrorism suspects, Rachel breaks down why all this supposed outrage is nothing more than an effort to win political points:
This is the exact point that so many were making during the health care debate. We can have an honest debate over what is the best way to reform our health care system, it is just hard when you have tea party members running around claiming that "Grandma is going to die" if reform passes.
When you set up a debate where your "facts" are rooted in everything but facts, it is really going to be hard to have a legitimate discussion on how best to move the country forward. When you have a whole news network that is helping to promote these "facts", it is going to be an even bigger struggle to push back against the misinformation with the truth. After all, it is much more interesting to discuss how a guy walked into an ACORN office while dressed as a pimp rather than how this same individual manipulated video in order to destroy a community organizing organization.
Nothing to see here...move along!
From the so-called ACORN pimp scandel, to President Obama's recess appointments, to civilian trials for terrorism suspects, Rachel breaks down why all this supposed outrage is nothing more than an effort to win political points:
This is the exact point that so many were making during the health care debate. We can have an honest debate over what is the best way to reform our health care system, it is just hard when you have tea party members running around claiming that "Grandma is going to die" if reform passes.
When you set up a debate where your "facts" are rooted in everything but facts, it is really going to be hard to have a legitimate discussion on how best to move the country forward. When you have a whole news network that is helping to promote these "facts", it is going to be an even bigger struggle to push back against the misinformation with the truth. After all, it is much more interesting to discuss how a guy walked into an ACORN office while dressed as a pimp rather than how this same individual manipulated video in order to destroy a community organizing organization.
Nothing to see here...move along!
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Racism on C-SPAN? Jon Stewart has the Answer
C-SPAN recently had a person call-in during one of their programs who complained that too many black people were calling in on the phone line that is designated for Republicans.
Jon Stewart and The Daily Show take it from there:
Jon Stewart and The Daily Show take it from there:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Fear of a Black C-SPANet | ||||
| ||||
Saturday, March 27, 2010
AFP State Director on Apologizing to Man with Parkinson's: "It's not Something that I've Considered"
On March 21, 2010, the Health Care Reform legislation was signed into law after a contentious and heated year of debate that gave way to the rise of the Tea Party movement.
As health care reform became the primary target of this movement, we saw Fox News and the Republican Party latch onto this rage and harness it into a well promoted and corporate sponsored Conservative machine. This machine rolled through the country, turning out large crowds who carried signs declaring that we were being taken over by Communists and who showed up to health care town hall meetings to shout down members of Congress who supported any and all versions of proposed health care legislation.
During the past year, this Tea Party movement has continually claimed that they are a grassroots movement of concerned patriots, but as has been highlighted on this blog as well as in other media outlets, Republican backed corporate dollars have played a large role in assuring that the Tea Party momentum continues to build.
This momentum and this outrage that has been primarily directed at the Obama Administration and at progressives in general, has also been adopted by Republican politicians for reasons that are self-explanatory. The result of so many interests trying to work within the same movement has resulted in a brand of schizophrenic conservatism that mixes (what started out as) a primarily Libertarian movement and the politics of traditional Republican Party from the last few decades.
After a year of promotion by a major news channel and lots of Republican money being pumped into this cause, it is clear that those traditional Republican interests appear to be having an impact. Locally, members of the Cincinnati Tea Party have held rallies at which former Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) spoke. Many members of the tea party that I have talked to are advocating voting to put the long-time Republican Party member back into Congress in order to get Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-OH) out. I have also talked with members of the tea party who feel that it is not a viable strategy to back more Libertarian-based third party candidates. Instead, it is clear that getting Democrats out of Congress is the priority, even if it means putting familiar Republican faces back into power.
While the confusion and internal struggles of the Tea Party movement are sometimes disguised, what has been most noticeable over this past year has been the anger and sometimes violent rhetoric. Locally, I documented some of the behavior that was evident at local town hall meetings and nationally we have seen racist, homophobic and violent rhetoric directed at those with who this movement disagrees. This behavior continued right up until (and ever since) the passage of this bill.
The Saturday before the House of Representative passed the legislation, there was a "Hands off my Healthcare" rally in Columbus, Ohio that was organized by Americans for Prosperity. Americans for Prosperity (AFP) has been one of the groups that has been instrumental in keeping the tea party momentum rolling by using their corporate funds and expert PR personnel to whip up the anger. Rachel Maddow:
At this "Hands off my Health Care" rally in Columbus, an incident transpired that has been widely circulated. Bob Letcher, a 60-year-old man with Parkinson's Disease, was mocked, yelled at and had dollar bills thrown at him by anti-reformers as he sat quietly with his sign advocating his support for health care reform. Video from The Columbus Dispatch captured the scene:
Following this event, the State Director for AFP Rebecca Heimlich, told Talking Points Memo:
I caught up with Heimlich after a Conservative-sponsored candidates forum the other evening to ask about AFP's future plans, but also to ask whether AFP was going to apologize to Mr. Letcher for the behavior of individuals at an event which they sponsored. The full interview is below and the specific question about Letcher is at about 1:35 into the clip:
(Note: I refer to Bob Letcher as "Bob Letchman" during this interview. That was my spoken mistake. I also mention that Letcher had described the movement as being "cultivatively violent or harsh or something along those lines." Letcher's quote is "cultivatively angry" and can be found here.)
In short, Heimlich did not know if it would "be appropriate" for AFP to issue Letcher an apology because it was not clear that the "man in the white shirt" was a member of her organization. She also stated that she didn't know if it would be AFP's "responsibility" to issue an apology due to this event having many sponsors.
Heimlich also stated that she does not think that this movement is primarily violent or angry and that she has not seen any other inappropriate behavior at her events. She also said that she thinks it is good for people to express their opinions in a respectful way and even went as far as calling a moment where two sides were yelling at each other "substantive debate".
Since my interview with Heimlich, the "man in the white shirt" has been identified as Chris Reichert and interviewed by the Columbus Dispatch. In his interview, he told the paper that he was sorry:
As Reichert begins his own healing process, groups like AFP continue to forge ahead in attempts to make health care an issue in upcoming elections. The fact still remains however that the Conservative and Tea Party movements are still trying to figure out if they are really Libertarians or Republicans with a new populist message. This disconnect was illustrated at the end of my interview with Heimlich:
So the Tea Party movement is no different from the 9/12 movement. Glenn Beck motivates the 9/12 Movement with his show much like AFP motivates Tea Party groups with their rallies, yet Heimlich doesn't know if Beck is a positive voice for her movement? Schizophrenic Conservatism indeed.
This piece is cross posted here.
As health care reform became the primary target of this movement, we saw Fox News and the Republican Party latch onto this rage and harness it into a well promoted and corporate sponsored Conservative machine. This machine rolled through the country, turning out large crowds who carried signs declaring that we were being taken over by Communists and who showed up to health care town hall meetings to shout down members of Congress who supported any and all versions of proposed health care legislation.
During the past year, this Tea Party movement has continually claimed that they are a grassroots movement of concerned patriots, but as has been highlighted on this blog as well as in other media outlets, Republican backed corporate dollars have played a large role in assuring that the Tea Party momentum continues to build.
This momentum and this outrage that has been primarily directed at the Obama Administration and at progressives in general, has also been adopted by Republican politicians for reasons that are self-explanatory. The result of so many interests trying to work within the same movement has resulted in a brand of schizophrenic conservatism that mixes (what started out as) a primarily Libertarian movement and the politics of traditional Republican Party from the last few decades.
After a year of promotion by a major news channel and lots of Republican money being pumped into this cause, it is clear that those traditional Republican interests appear to be having an impact. Locally, members of the Cincinnati Tea Party have held rallies at which former Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) spoke. Many members of the tea party that I have talked to are advocating voting to put the long-time Republican Party member back into Congress in order to get Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-OH) out. I have also talked with members of the tea party who feel that it is not a viable strategy to back more Libertarian-based third party candidates. Instead, it is clear that getting Democrats out of Congress is the priority, even if it means putting familiar Republican faces back into power.
While the confusion and internal struggles of the Tea Party movement are sometimes disguised, what has been most noticeable over this past year has been the anger and sometimes violent rhetoric. Locally, I documented some of the behavior that was evident at local town hall meetings and nationally we have seen racist, homophobic and violent rhetoric directed at those with who this movement disagrees. This behavior continued right up until (and ever since) the passage of this bill.
The Saturday before the House of Representative passed the legislation, there was a "Hands off my Healthcare" rally in Columbus, Ohio that was organized by Americans for Prosperity. Americans for Prosperity (AFP) has been one of the groups that has been instrumental in keeping the tea party momentum rolling by using their corporate funds and expert PR personnel to whip up the anger. Rachel Maddow:
This is what these groups do. They're experts at fake grass roots campaigns that promote corporate interests. Americans for Prosperity is the group that ginned up anti-stimulus rallies earlier this year. They also organized what they called the "Hot Air Tour" to campaign against the whole idea of global warming. They were the ones who sent Joe the Plumber around the country to rail against the Employee Free Choice Act, which is pro-labor legislation.
This oil industry and Republican operative billionaires club is according to the Republican party spokesman today, just average middle class Americans. Just regular American folks sitting around the kitchen table thinking about whether they can get away with saying that the government, continuing its long standing policy of encouraging living wills, is really a secret plot to kill old people.
[...]
These guys are the pros. This is an industry. Americans are showing up at these events to shout down the discussion, to chase their Congressmen, and they are enraged. And they're enraged at least in part because they're being riled up by over the top, fabricated conspiracy theories about health care. And they're being directed and orchestrated by the corporate interests that do this for a living and do it very well.
At this "Hands off my Health Care" rally in Columbus, an incident transpired that has been widely circulated. Bob Letcher, a 60-year-old man with Parkinson's Disease, was mocked, yelled at and had dollar bills thrown at him by anti-reformers as he sat quietly with his sign advocating his support for health care reform. Video from The Columbus Dispatch captured the scene:
Following this event, the State Director for AFP Rebecca Heimlich, told Talking Points Memo:
"I have seen the video and found the man's behavior completely inappropriate. Americans for Prosperity certainly does not encourage or condone harassing behavior. Our goal is to send a message to Rep. Kilroy that we oppose this health care takeover bill. We always encourage our members to be considerate of others in their demonstrations."
I caught up with Heimlich after a Conservative-sponsored candidates forum the other evening to ask about AFP's future plans, but also to ask whether AFP was going to apologize to Mr. Letcher for the behavior of individuals at an event which they sponsored. The full interview is below and the specific question about Letcher is at about 1:35 into the clip:
(Note: I refer to Bob Letcher as "Bob Letchman" during this interview. That was my spoken mistake. I also mention that Letcher had described the movement as being "cultivatively violent or harsh or something along those lines." Letcher's quote is "cultivatively angry" and can be found here.)
In short, Heimlich did not know if it would "be appropriate" for AFP to issue Letcher an apology because it was not clear that the "man in the white shirt" was a member of her organization. She also stated that she didn't know if it would be AFP's "responsibility" to issue an apology due to this event having many sponsors.
Heimlich also stated that she does not think that this movement is primarily violent or angry and that she has not seen any other inappropriate behavior at her events. She also said that she thinks it is good for people to express their opinions in a respectful way and even went as far as calling a moment where two sides were yelling at each other "substantive debate".
Since my interview with Heimlich, the "man in the white shirt" has been identified as Chris Reichert and interviewed by the Columbus Dispatch. In his interview, he told the paper that he was sorry:
"He's got every right to do what he did and some may say I did too, but what I did was shameful," Reichert said. "I haven't slept since that day."
"I made a donation (to a local Parkinson's disease group) and that starts the healing process."
As Reichert begins his own healing process, groups like AFP continue to forge ahead in attempts to make health care an issue in upcoming elections. The fact still remains however that the Conservative and Tea Party movements are still trying to figure out if they are really Libertarians or Republicans with a new populist message. This disconnect was illustrated at the end of my interview with Heimlich:
CB: Do you think Glenn Beck is a positive voice for your movement?
RH: ...I don't watch that show, so I can't really tell you if I think he is or not because [...] I don't know that much about him...
CB: Is there any differentiation you think between the 9/12 groups and the Tea Party groups or is it pretty much...?
RH: From what I have seen in Ohio, they all work together I mean they are all part of the Ohio Liberty Council, so I have not seen any differentiation.
So the Tea Party movement is no different from the 9/12 movement. Glenn Beck motivates the 9/12 Movement with his show much like AFP motivates Tea Party groups with their rallies, yet Heimlich doesn't know if Beck is a positive voice for her movement? Schizophrenic Conservatism indeed.
This piece is cross posted here.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Mandel's Campaign Blocks Cameras at Public Forum
My initial intention in covering this event was to talk to attendees and participants to see where the Conservative movement is heading. Now that the health care reform legislation has become law, it is a forum like this that can give some insight into the direction that the Republican Party will choose to take.
However my initial goal was sidetracked once the Republican Candidate for Ohio State Treasurer, Josh Mandel, took the stage. At 32, Mandel is currently the youngest member of the Ohio House of Representatives, has served in the Marine Corp. and has been on two tours of duty in Iraq. As Mandel took the stage, he was given a standing ovation for his service and it was clear during the first few moments of his speech that he was going to be well-received.
Shortly into my videotaping of Mandel's remarks, my attention was drawn to my right, where another gentleman was videotaping the speech. A member of Mandel's campaign, who I would later identify as Joel Riter, was trying to block this man's camera. (Riter is also the Legislative Aide for Josh Mandel in the Ohio House) It took me a moment to realize what was happening, but I quickly turned my own camera lens on this situation.
Once Riter noticed that he was being recorded, he promptly came over to me as I turned my lens back to the speech. Riter proceeded to hold his Blackberry approximately six inches from my face and take multiple pictures of me. In-between pictures, he proceeded to block my camera lens from videotaping Josh Mandel's speech.
I confronted Riter, asking what why he was standing in front of my camera to which he replied: "Are you working with the Democrats?" When I told him that I wasn't he said, "I thought you were, you're not?" Again, I said that I wasn't and Riter informed me that he was blocking the other man's camera because he did work with the Democrats. Here is the video:
After the candidate forum ended and I had packed up my video equipment, I ran into Josh Mandel outside. I approached him to ask about this incident, but as you will hear, once he heard that The Cincinnati Beacon has a "liberal" perspective, he completely ignored me.
Mandel made time for Republicans Phil and Rebecca Heimlich and even Democratic City Council member Cecil Thomas, but ignored my attempts to ask him about his staffer. I approached Councilman Thomas about the situation after Mandel had finished with him. Here is the audio beginning with my questioning of Mandel:
After the event, I asked the other gentleman who was having his camera blocked, if he had a moment for a question or two. He referred me to Seth Bringman, the Communications Director for the Ohio Democratic Party. Bringman issued this statement:
“Tracking your opponents is a standard practice of both parties. We had a tracker from the Ohio Democratic Party at this event, which was open to the public. Like any of our trackers, he was both respectful and professional.”
Even though both Joel Riter and Josh Mandel did not comment on this matter at the event, I also made an attempt to contact Michael Long, the Political Director for Mandel's campaign. He did not respond to either my email request or to the message that I left with his office. If I hear back, I will post his response in full.
While the majority of the Candidate forum was calm and civil, this incident took several by surprise. I had more than one citizen come up to me in the ballroom asking who the "man blocking the cameras" was. When I explained who he was and why he was blocking the cameras, these attendees expressed disgust and made mention that they would contact the campaign. You even heard COAST member Mark Miller say that this behavior is "not cool" in my interview with Cecil Thomas.
As the Mandel Campaign and Mandel himself remain silent on this issue, the fact remains that they felt it appropriate to block the cameras of those who they disagreed with during a public forum. Joel Riter operated under the assumption that I was with the Democrats and though he apologized to me personally when he realized I was not, still felt justified in blocking the camera of the gentleman who was working for the Democrats.
Josh Mandel also decided that he would only permit himself to be asked questions by media outlets who have a "Conservative" lean as evidenced by his repeated dismissal of my questions. These actions are quite curious for a candidate who claims to run his campaign with "honesty" and "integrity".
This piece is cross posted here.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Chris Matthews Clip Berating Rep. Grayson is Given new Light
Daily Kos has dug into the January 2010 archives and pulled out this telling clip from Hardball with Chris Matthews:
Rep. Grayson (D-FL) was trying to explain to Matthews how the Democrats no longer would need 60 votes to pass the health care legislation due to the process of reconciliation, but Matthews would have none of it.
He continually made fun of Grayson and dismissed his views as "outside" the traditional Washington way of thinking. This segment was quite telling about where Matthews is coming from:
Notice that Matthews was chiding Grayson for supposedly pandering to the "netroots" and while we now know that Grayson was simply telling Matthews exactly what was happening, it speaks to the value that Matthews puts on various opinions. He obviously respects the viewpoints that are inside the beltway and is very dismissive of "outside" views no matter the validity that they hold.
Matthews continued:
See? Matthews is an "insider" so he is "in the know" on these issues and when Grayson dare stray from this mindset, Matthews is all over him. See how this works within the beltway and why this mindset doesn't yield the best results? At the end of this exchange Matthews bet Grayson that reconciliation wouldn't happen.
Seems like Matthews was wrong on reconciliation and if the reconciliation package passes the Senate, it will be interesting to see what Matthews will have to say.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Rep. Grayson (D-FL) was trying to explain to Matthews how the Democrats no longer would need 60 votes to pass the health care legislation due to the process of reconciliation, but Matthews would have none of it.
He continually made fun of Grayson and dismissed his views as "outside" the traditional Washington way of thinking. This segment was quite telling about where Matthews is coming from:
MATTHEWS: In the Senate, you have to get 60 votes. Why do you think the Democrats fought like hell to get 60 votes? Why do you think the President and everybody else is dying over the fact that they lost Massachusetts? Because it didn't matter? You think they're all crazy over there, but you're smart?
GRAYSON: No, I didn't say that. What I'm saying is that everyone's been talking about reconciliation, and nobody has the guts to do it.
MATTHEWS: Name the United States Senator that's willing to do this. You keep talking about it...
GRAYSON: I think that's what you'll probably see at this point.
MATTHEWS: [Laughs.] Wanna bet? [Laughs.] Do you want to bet that they're gonna do this? In other words, they killed themselves to get 60 votes, but now they're gonna say all we need is 50, and Biden to break the tie.
GRAYSON: They shouldn't have killed themselves to get 60 votes. This is something they could've done six months ago.
MATTHEWS: This is netroots talk!
GRAYSON: No, look...
MATTHEWS: This is outsider talk, and you're an elected official...
GRAYSON: That's not true. That's not true.
MATTHEWS: ...and you know you can't do it. You're pandering to the netroots right now. I know what you're doing!
GRAYSON: You are wrong! This is something we talk about with the leadership in our caucus meetings every week!
Notice that Matthews was chiding Grayson for supposedly pandering to the "netroots" and while we now know that Grayson was simply telling Matthews exactly what was happening, it speaks to the value that Matthews puts on various opinions. He obviously respects the viewpoints that are inside the beltway and is very dismissive of "outside" views no matter the validity that they hold.
Matthews continued:
GRAYSON: When did you become the Senate parliamentarian? Did I miss that?
MATTHEWS: Well, I worked over there for many, many years, and I worked for the Speaker for six years, I worked 15 years up there...
GRAYSON: Well, I'm speaking to the Speaker and the leadership this year...
MATTHEWS: ...and I know what I'm talking about! You ask anybody... you ask anybody in the Senate right now... Go call the Senate legislative counsel's office and ask them if you can do this. Go ask the parliamentarians if you can do this. You haven't bothered to do that.
GRAYSON: No, the leadership...
MATTHEWS: [Laughs.]
GRAYSON: ...my leadership has done that. And my answer is yes.
See? Matthews is an "insider" so he is "in the know" on these issues and when Grayson dare stray from this mindset, Matthews is all over him. See how this works within the beltway and why this mindset doesn't yield the best results? At the end of this exchange Matthews bet Grayson that reconciliation wouldn't happen.
Seems like Matthews was wrong on reconciliation and if the reconciliation package passes the Senate, it will be interesting to see what Matthews will have to say.
On World Water Day, A Closer Look at the Bottled Water Industry
It is no secret that the bottled water industry is a booming $5 billion a year industry. We are constantly bombarded with ads that tell us that our tap water is unsafe and that we should opt for the so-called "cleaner" and "more refreshing" alternative.
While marketing campaigns for Dasani, Aquafina and FIJI can be found throughout various media outlets, the topic that doesn't get much attention is how the bottled water industry operates. Annie Leonard, the Director of "Story of Stuff Project", opines:
Here is the 8 minute video that Leonard has put together to simply explain how the bottled water industry has used manufactured demand to convince the population that they need this product:
While marketing campaigns for Dasani, Aquafina and FIJI can be found throughout various media outlets, the topic that doesn't get much attention is how the bottled water industry operates. Annie Leonard, the Director of "Story of Stuff Project", opines:
Today is World Water Day--a good day to pause and consider the insanity of a global economy where 1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water while other people spend billions on a bottled product that's no cleaner, harms people and the environment and costs up to 2,000 times the price of tap water.
To mark the occasion, I'm joining with a bunch of North America's leading environmental groups to release our new film: The Story of Bottled Water. It's a seven-minute animated film that, like The Story of Stuff, uses simple images and words to explain a complex problem caused by what I call the 'take-make-waste' economy. In this case, we explain how you get Americans to buy half a billion bottles of water a week when most can get it almost free from the tap in their kitchen.
[...]
The thing is, there are a lot of inconvenient truths the bottled water ads don't mention:
• Bottled water is subject to fewer health regulations than tap water. In 2006, Fiji Water ran ads bragging that their product doesn't come from Cleveland, only to have tests show a glass of Fiji water is lower quality than Cleveland tap. Oops!
• Up to 40 percent of bottled water is filtered tap water. In other words, if you're concerned about what's in your tap water, just cut out the middleman and buy a home water filter.
• Each year, according to the Pacific Institute's Peter Gleick, making the plastic water bottles used in the U.S. takes enough oil and energy to fuel a million cars. And that doesn't even include the fuel required to ship, fly or truck water across continents and state lines.
• Three-fourths of the half-a-billion plastic water bottles sold in the U.S. every week go to the landfill or to incinerators. It costs our cities more than $70 million to landfill water bottles alone each year, according to Corporate Accountability International.
Here is the 8 minute video that Leonard has put together to simply explain how the bottled water industry has used manufactured demand to convince the population that they need this product:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
