TODAY'S TOPICS: (No time!), Hillary, PA Election, McCain, Pentagon, Scheer, Hightower, Wexler
Sorry, no time for any comment these days...redoing our entire CFC website right now:
Solomon on the Pentagon Scandal:
While it’s a positive step, the big front-page New York Times article on Sunday — “Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand” — is tardy by several years and now makes a remarkable detour around the active role of the television networks themselves in implementing systemic disinformation efforts for starting and continuing war. As I say in the documentary film War Made Easy, “Nobody forced the major networks like CNN to do so much commentary from retired generals and admirals and all the rest of it.” And that just begins to tell the sordid and bloody tale.
This kind of stuff is 24/7 wartime wallpaper for cable news. The extent of the war-propaganda problem is such that the Times just scratched the surface. For a look at some grim media cases-in-point and samples from War Made Easy, go to: http://www.warmadeeasythemovie.org/
In case you didn’t see coverage of it, see here:
http://alternet.org/blogs/video/83167/
"But let's be honest about stop-loss. This is sort of a myth of the left."
-- Author Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, 4/10/08
VERSUS
"Lieutenant General James D. Thurman, deputy chief of staff for operations, said he hoped that wartime demand for troops will decline enough by around the fall of next year to end 'stop-loss.' He said there are more than 12,000 currently serving under the practice -- an action that critics have called a backdoor draft.
-- AP, 4/22/08
VIDEO SECTION
c&l: Jon Stewart comes down hard on the Pentagon’s manipulative propaganda racket revealed by The New York Times last week.
The Iraq War! Remember? Remember when it started, and it was kind of big deal that some journalists were embedded with the troops? Well, this is great. As it turns out, it was more of an exchange program. Because they actually also had troops embedded with the journalists!
Glenn Greenwald:
As I noted on Sunday, the most striking part of the roughly-7000-word article was that several of the most guilty news outlets — CBS, NBC and Fox — just outright refused to answer the NYT’s questions about their use of military analysts, what they knew about their analysts’ dealings with the Pentagon and the defense industry, and what procedures they use (then and now) to ensure that they don’t broadcast government propaganda disguised as independent analysis. Identically, other news organizations not explicitly mentioned by the NYT article but which used some of the tainted sources (such as The Washington Post) have similarly failed to address their role in disseminating this Pentagon-controlled propaganda.
Media organizations simply ignore — collectively blackout — any stories that expose major corruption in their news reporting, as evidenced by the fact that no major network or cable news programs have ever meaningfully examined the fundamental failures of the media in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
As Bill Moyers noted at the beginning of his truly superb documentary on the media-government collaboration concerning the invasion: “The story of how the media bought what the White House was selling has not been told in depth on television.” Thus, one of the most significant political stories of this generation — what Moyers described as “our press largely surrender[ing] its independence and skepticism to join with our Government in marching to war” — has simply been rendered invisible by our largest media outlets. That scandal just does not exist, particularly on television.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/23/the-daily-show-on-the-pentagons-message-force-multipliers/
How cool is this? Olbermann is on Letterman and discusses the need for public financing of elections. I happen to be working on that very same issue myself, and as I always say, it is the HOLY GRAIL of public policy goals…through it, all else becomes possible. I’d explain more if I had time and energy
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/24/olbermann-on-letterman-the-priority-of-public-campaign-financing/
Countdown’s Worst Persons…always classic…McCain and Hagee honored…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/24/countdowns-worst-persons-in-the-world-john-ashcroft-pastor-bird-and-mccains-choice-in-spiritual-advisors/
Daily Show covers the horror that was the PA primary:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/24/the-daily-show-the-long-flat-seemingly-endless-bataan-death-march-to-the-white-house/
Wexler Confronts Mueller on CIA Torture and Lack Of Investigation By FBI
I would urge you to contact the editors and news departments of your local media and ask them to look into the responses below. It is critical that this discussion takes place beyond emails and blogs – and is covered by the mainstream media.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/23/wexler-confronts-mueller-on-cia-torture-and-lack-of-investigation-by-fbi/
Jim Hightower breaks down the McCain myth…
http://alternet.org/blogs/video/83275/
Rove v. Abrams…I can’t wait for this criminal to be put under oath. Apparently he doesn’t appreciate the coverage Abrams has given to the Siegelman case…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/22/verdict-abrams-reponds-to-roves-letter-re-siegelman-coverage/
ARTICLE SECTION
Robert Scheer on the disgrace that his hillary…and all those Democrats that still vote for her...
A few clips:
On primary election day in Pennsylvania, even with polls showing her well ahead in that state, Hillary went lower in her grab for votes. Seizing upon a question as to how she would respond to a nuclear attack by Iran, which doesn't have nuclear weapons, on Israel, which does, Hillary mocked reasoned discourse by promising to "totally obliterate them," in an apparent reference to the population of Iran. That is not a word gaffe; it is an assertion of the right of our nation to commit genocide on an unprecedented scale.
SNIP
What better argument do the ayatollahs need to justify their obtaining a nuclear "deterrent" than that the possible leader of the first nation to develop nuclear weapons, and the only one to ever use them to kill people, now threatens the people of Iran with obliteration?
http://alternet.org/columnists/story/83291/
This is classic! A blogger points out, based on mccain’s interview a few days ago on This Week, is a total dick:
At some point during yesterday's interview on This Week with George Stephanopoulos's Hair, John McCain went from being "that cranky, hypocritical jerk-off" to a total dick. It is something of a remarkable journey since 2000, when he was that "honorable" man who was punched in the junk by Karl Rove in South Carolina, a blow that left him emasculated and obedient to the Bush administration, a dog leashed up and beaten into acquiescence.
No, McCain was never the "maverick" the slobbering media wants him to be: he was just a slightly less cocksucking regular Republican. The shit on McCain that's been covered up because of the complicity of the press would make John Kennedy lift his head out of a stripper's twat and say, "Goddamn, and I thought they loved me."Let's put aside for a moment the Fantasyland in which reside his economic "policies." Instead, check out what he said about the endorsement he begged for and got from John Hagee, the Armageddon-humping megachurch pastor who hates him some Catholics. When he was asked if hand-jobbing Hagee for an endorsement was a mistake, McCain, crazy maverick that he is, said, "Oh, probably, sure. But I admire and respect Dr. Hagee’s leadership of the — of his church. I admire and appreciate his advocacy for the state of Israel, the independence of the state of Israel. I condemn remarks that are made that has anything to do which is condemning of the Catholic Church."
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2008/04/john-mccain-is-total-dick-at-some-point.html
Another Bushed…sigh…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/24/countdowns-bushed-best-laid-plans-edition-2/
ELECTION PROBLEMS IN PENNSYLVANIA
As Brad sarcastically notes, we have NO WAY of knowing that the vote count was correct...PA has the worst of the worst e-voting machines, and no way of verifying what they tell us...
Brad:
Of course, you conspiracy theorists out there are likely to spin this tale of remarkable providence, into a shadowy tale of skulduggery by supporters of a Clinton nomination, be they Democrats or Republicans, who'd rather see her, instead of Obama, go up against John McCain in the fall. But you'd have not an iota of actual proof to support your paranoid suspicions. nfortunately, neither do the Pennsylvania Election Officials or media outlets who reported Clinton as having won, by "double-digits" nonetheless...
So the computers reported that she won --- whether dramatically or not --- beyond a shadow of a doubt in both states!
Well...beyond a shadow of a doubt may be an overstatement, since in Pennsylvania it's not as if the officials there could actually prove that any vote cast yesterday for a candidate on the ballot on any of the 85% of the state's votes recorded on electronic machines, was actually cast or recorded as any voter intended. But still...even with a 100% dearth of actual evidence to prove that Clinton won, much less by a comfortable, well, a one-tenth of a percent margin large enough to quality as "double-digit" for most of the media...well, you must admit that she's a very very lucky woman, and you can't prove otherwise either!
Your fertile imagination is a threat to our democracy, and thus to the very foundation of our nation!
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5924
Pennsylvania Primary: E-Voting, Registration, Polling Place Problem Report Wire...
Yesterday (and this morning) we tracked problem reports with voting machines and registration issues across the Keystone State.
The mass of reported issues resulted, as one consortium of observers in Pennsylvania described it, in "problems with voting machines and inaccurate voter registration rolls caused countless eligible voters to be needlessly refused the right to vote."
The problems were so wide-spread, that even Fox "News" was forced to report on them (video included at link below), even as the reaction from officials -- or lack thereof -- may have been even more remarkable. If you didn't check in during yesterday's election, or this morning, you may wish to click the link below to get some idea of what actually happened...
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5918
Exclusive: PA's Primary Results Website Listed Obama Three Times
With Three Differing Totals on Election Night Oddity, Which Applied Only to Obama, Never Occurred Before, Remains Unexplained,
But 'Didn't Make a Difference' in Final Results, According to State Official Who Confirmed the Anomaly...
Early on election night last Tuesday, with just 18.07% of the unofficial returns from the Pennsylvania Primary in, astute BRAD BLOG reader Matt Sircely (who was aware enough to save off the HTML page locally!) noticed the following oddity on the official Dept. of State website results page...
Note the three different sets of bars and percentages representing Obama's tally. The problem did not occur for any other candidate, as seen on the full web page, which was noticed early in the evening, and saved locally by the alert reader. Sircely called the PA Dept. of State to try and get an explanation of what caused the problem seen above.
The spokesperson confirmed the problem, which only appears to have affected Obama, and had never happened for anybody else in any previous elections, before she added: "it didn't make a difference though."(Much more, including audio from Sircely's call to the DoS spokesperson, included at the link below)...
FULL STORY, PHONE CALL AUDIO: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5925
NEWS CLIPS
"The conflict in Darfur is deteriorating, with full deployment of a new peacekeeping force delayed until 2009 and no prospect of a political settlement," United Nations officials said yesterday. Estimates say perhaps 300,000 have died and some 4.27 million are "seriously affected by the conflict."
CALIFORNIA: California home foreclosures hit a record 47,171 in the first quarter, more than four times as many as a year earlier.
The Environmental Defense Fund released a report on the eve of Earth Day "that suggests implementing a cap-and-trade program to cut greenhouse gas emissions would not slow the U.S. economy or cost jobs, contradicting a report released recently by a group of manufacturers that oppose a climate change bill." Overall, the report says that "the economy would continue to grow at an average clip of 3 percent."
At least two dozen detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere "say they were given drugs against their will or witnessed other inmates being drugged." The allegations have resurfaced since the release this month of a 2003 Justice Department memo by former DOJ official John Yoo "that explicitly condoned the use of drugs on detainees."
Friday, April 25, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
TODAY'S TOPICS: PA Primary, E-Voting, Iran Lies, McCain, Pentagon Scandal, Maher, A Priest, Edwards v. McCain, Wright
I don’t have much time today so my only comments about today’s GIANT PA primary is that
A. pray Obama wins! That would finish Hillary.
B. He probably won’t, but it should be close.
C. We are going to learn a whole lot by the end of today as to whether all the attacks on Obama, and that debate, had an adverse effect. Remember though, PA was tailor made for Hillary, lots of uneducated, older white people…lots of women too. That’s the best demographic in the nation for her…so don’t think because, or if, she wins today that is an ominous sign…its not.
AND FINALLY…
BEWARE OF ELECTION FRAUD!! PA has the most vulnerable election system in the nation…they use a who’s who of e-voting machine abominations that can easily be hacked and manipulated...without any way of knowing that they were. In other words, get ready for "faith based voting" today...
See this from Brad:
The Pennsylvania Primary: Democracy of the Gods
Tuesday's Election Will be 'Unrecountable, Unverifiable, and Unauditable'...
On Tuesday night, you will be told who the winner of the Pennsylvania Primary is. You will accept it. You will have no choice. No matter who the winner really is. Or isn't.
This Tuesday's crucial contest will be primarily run on 100% faith-based, touch-screen e-voting machines across the state. There will be no way to determine after the election whether the computers have accurately recorded, or not, the intent of those voters who voted on them. As VerifiedVoting.org summarizes the crucial contest, it "will be essentially unrecountable, unverifiable, and unauditable."
As with South Carolina's primary, so so long ago, and other states since, whatever the officials tell you at the end of the election, is what you, and we, will have to accept. Whether votes are counted accurately is completely out of anybody's hands at this point. It's strictly Democracy of the Gods...
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5916
FUN FACTS...
And 15 percent erroneously think Obama's a Muslim, thanks in part to disinformation widely spread on the Internet, and hinted at by Republicans, the media, and hillary.
One in Three Returning Vets Suffer from Brain Injuries, Mental Health Problems
“Achieving the 15% (Bush) goal (to replace 15% of domestic gasolinewith biofuels in 10 years) would require the entire current U. S. corn crop, which represents a whopping 40% of the world's corn supply.”
-- Colin Carter, Ph.D., UC-Davis on the ethanol scam that will lead to more poverty, more emissions, and the waste of billions in taxpayer dollars that could go to ACTUAL climate change solutions
VIDEO SECTION
Olbermann suggests 8 questions for stephanapoulous to ask McCain…classic:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/keith-olbermann-gives-stephanopoulos-some-questions-to-ask-of-mccain/
This is absolutely awesome! Watch this white priest defend Rev. Wright in one of those O’Reilly interview ambushes he has his people do. This is EXACTLY how Wright should have been defended from the beginning…rather than everyone throwing him under the bus…you got to see this! Oh, Rev. Wright is doing his first major interview on Thursday, with Moyers! A must see...
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/priest-pwns-bill-oreillys-minion-on-rev-wright/
The great Bill Maher dismantles the mind bending ludicrousness of the whole “elitism” lie…in that, its right wing, super rich and powerful, or religious fundamentalists (the very definition of “elitism”…in their own minds anyway) calling left progressives who fight for economic justice “elitists”! McCain and Bush…the very definition of “elites”…in the negative sense, not in the “elite human beings” sense…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/real-time-with-bill-maher-new-rules-on-being-an-elitist/
Want to hear what a REAL JOURNALIST sounds like? Watch Leila Fadel interviewed by Bill Moyers. She is an unbelievably courageous and skilled journalist (only 26 years old), who is now running the McClatchy news service bureau in Iraq (they are by far the best corporate news group). She also just received the George Polk Award for Foreign Reporting. In this interview she bluntly lays bare all the spin on Iraq and Iran in a way that is all too rare these days.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/21/mcclatchys-leila-fadel-cuts-through-the-bs-on-iraq-and-iran/
DNC’S first ad against McCain…its nice to know Howard Dean is chairman now…this definitely has a Dean feel:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/20/dnc-launches-first-general-election-ad-better-off/
More of Olbermann’s bushed…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/countdowns-bushed-best-laid-plans-edition/
Elizabeth Edwards makes the point (perfectly I might add) that I have argued here that Dems need to make against McCain: “If you have guaranteed government funded health coverage, why not all Americans? And likewise, under McCain’s plan, if he wasn’t a senator, he would not have had his cancer surgeries covered…as it would have been a “pre-existing condition”…something I know all too well.
McCain gets asked this question, and his "answer" is very telling...an issue Obama will use in the General to great effect:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/20/this-week-bringing-up-mccains-life-long-federally-provided-health-care-is-a-cheap-shot/
MORE ON THE MCCAIN “ANSWER” TO EDWARDS FACT BASED ASSERTION
Elizabeth responds:
John McCain accused me of taking a "cheap shot" on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" yesterday for noting that people with preexisting conditions, such as he and I have, would not be able to get health care under his plan –- and that he perhaps was not as sensitive to this problem as he should be since he has been in government health care his whole life.
Sen. McCain noted that he was not receiving government health care for the six years he was in captivity. That is true. But it has nothing to do with my point — which is that the problem with Sen. McCain's health care plan is not how it affects us –- but how it affects the tens of millions of Americans with preexisting conditions who, unlike Sen. McCain and myself, do not have the resources to pay for quality health care.
That is not a cheap shot, it is a potentially life and death question for tens of million of Americans. And it is a question Sen. McCain must address.
McCain's health care plan is centered around the idea that we'd be better off if more Americans bought health coverage on their own, rather than receiving it through a job or government program. But maybe since he has never purchased insurance in the individual market, he does not know the challenge it presents for Americans with preexisting conditions.
END
Once again, here is a scandal worthy of non-stop front page media coverage…yet the silence is deafening from our corporatized fourth estate. Why? Well partly its because the media is directly complicit in this one.
From CYL:
Through newly obtained internal documents, The New York Times has uncovered an elaborate PR campaign run by the Pentagon that coached former military officials — or as they're known on television, Serious Independent Military Experts — on how best to shill for Donald Rumsfeld during the fallout from the "General's Revolt," when numerous high-ranking retired Generals broke long standing tradition and began speaking out harshly against the former Secretary and his prosecution of the War in Iraq.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/20/the-new-york-times-exposes-manipulative-dod-propaganda-racket/
Watch Greenwald’s latest documentary short proving that all the crazy attacks on Obama originate at Fox, and then are slowly picked up by the other media outlets…and then parroted ad nausea:
http://alternet.org/blogs/video/82998/
More Colbert on the ABC debate…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/18/stephen-colbert-praises-abc-for-a-great-debate/
HILLARY ON IRAN...SCARY...
Me: I'd also add something about the debate regarding actual substance. What really frightened me was what Hillary said on Iran, Israel, and the middle east. nothing less than a new imperial presidency.
I mean, creating an "umbrella" in the region, where we get involved militarily in other conflicts? Or that she would "massively respond" to anything Iran does against Israel? Or, that Iran is this big threat, when in fact the NIE has already proven they are not. There's also that pesky little fact that Iran hasn't invaded another country in 400 years - and has no discernible or logical reason for doing so now - yet we are supposed to believe they are going to invade Israel, or threaten us??
She sounded like McCain…and Obama wasn’t much better! He too parroted the lie that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, when in fact, the NIE report already debunked such fallacious claims! This kind of capitalizing to the war machine to not look “weak” is very worrisome to me.
Obama needs to start pointing out the facts about Iran…not the propaganda being pushed by this administration and Israeli fundamentalists! If he continues to do this, it will greatly weaken his hand when, or if, we bomb Iran.
But, I’m glad to say that Olbermann, Maddow, and C&L saw the same thing I did in their answers to the Iran question, particularly Hillary’s rather insane one:
First, C&L:
There was a substantive point during Wednesday’s debate that got missed by many in the deserved outrage over the hackery of the first hour. As I watched the debate, it was the single point at which I was tempted to throw my shoe at the screen, not only at the framing of the question by moderator George Stephanopoulos, but by the answers by Barack Obama and especially, Hillary Clinton. That question was over the issue of Iran. Stephanopoulos prefaced his question with the long-debunked but still oft-repeated neo-con talking point that Iran has threatened Israel and then continued with the assumption that Iran is still pursuing a nuclear program, a factoid directly contradicted by the NIE report the White House famously sought to suppress.
Apparently, the White House was so successful in obfuscating the findings of that NIE report that neither the News Division of a major network, nor the Senators sitting on the Armed Services (Hillary Clinton) or Foreign Relations/Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (Barack Obama), were aware of the findings. Sadly, both were completely comfortable, as Rachel Maddow put it, to further a talking point created by Charles Krauthammer.
Krauthammer is one of the many Neo-con war cheerleaders who has far too influential a reach for someone who has been so completely and utterly wrong on their Middle East plan. Obama, while a little more measured in his speech, did not reject the framing posed to him and said that “all options are on the table.” Clinton all but declared her intention to attack Iran, repeating that we could not allow Iran the right to develop a nuclear program.
A little history lesson for those determined to ignore it: Iran has NEVER attacked another country. Has never threatened to attack another country. The ruling mullahs have found nuclear weapons to be against the teachings of peace in the Koran and in fact, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah put together a foreign policy council to curtail Ahmadinejad’s powers as he has recognized Ahmadinejad’s tendency to be confrontational. I profess no special knowledge of Iran other than what I’ve studied using credible sources. If I can figure this stuff out and sort through the White House spin, what is Obama’s and Clinton’s excuse? I realize that expecting ABC to sort through the spin is more than we can hope from a news organization nowadays.
WATCH OLBERMANN AND MADDOW:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/18/countdown-democratic-debate-fulfilling-neo-con-dreams-for-iran/
CHARLIE GIBSON WAS WRONG in the debate ON CAPITAL GAINS
I so was wondering about this, because his continued claims in the debate about capital gains didn’t seem right to me, but I didn’t have the data to be sure. Just from a logical perspective, his point seemed to be implying a “causal” effect to something that could be completely unrelated.
Here’s CYL’s analysis:
GIBSON Comment: [H]istory shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.
While much of the well-deserved criticism of ABC’s Democratic debate on Wednesday night centered around the dwelling on gotcha questions and smears instead of substantive issues, when they finally did get around to a question that could have been considered a real issue, Charlie Gibson, who has a history of sandbagging Democrats with right-wing disinformation about Bush’s tax cuts, once again loaded up a question, disadvantaging the candidate and misled the millions of people watching:
As Jason Furman explains here, and as Len Burman explains here, the best evidence suggests otherwise. Cutting these taxes may lead to a temporary spike in revenue, because people sell stock to realize gains while rates are low. But over the long term, the biggest owners of stock—the wealthiest Americans—will mostly save what they will save, regardless of fluctuations in the rate.
The Congressional Budget Office notes that “the potentially large difference between the long- and short-term sensitivity of realizations to tax rates can mislead observers into assuming a greater permanent responsiveness than actually exists.”
As Barack Obama correctly alluded to, an article that same day reported that “the top 50 hedge fund managers earned a combined $29 billion in 2007. Five managers earned more than $1 billion.” One of the main reasons they are doing so well while the economy is teetering is that the income derived from stocks is currently being taxed at less than half of the rate of what people who actually work for a living have to pay on their salaries.
Salary in the highest tax bracket is taxed at 35 percent, but profits from stocks held long enough to be called “long-term capital gains” are taxed at 15 percent. A hedge fund manager making $100 million in a year would pay $15 million to the government if he is able to take his income as capital gains, not the $35 million he would have to pay if the income was considered salary.
I don’t have much time today so my only comments about today’s GIANT PA primary is that
A. pray Obama wins! That would finish Hillary.
B. He probably won’t, but it should be close.
C. We are going to learn a whole lot by the end of today as to whether all the attacks on Obama, and that debate, had an adverse effect. Remember though, PA was tailor made for Hillary, lots of uneducated, older white people…lots of women too. That’s the best demographic in the nation for her…so don’t think because, or if, she wins today that is an ominous sign…its not.
AND FINALLY…
BEWARE OF ELECTION FRAUD!! PA has the most vulnerable election system in the nation…they use a who’s who of e-voting machine abominations that can easily be hacked and manipulated...without any way of knowing that they were. In other words, get ready for "faith based voting" today...
See this from Brad:
The Pennsylvania Primary: Democracy of the Gods
Tuesday's Election Will be 'Unrecountable, Unverifiable, and Unauditable'...
On Tuesday night, you will be told who the winner of the Pennsylvania Primary is. You will accept it. You will have no choice. No matter who the winner really is. Or isn't.
This Tuesday's crucial contest will be primarily run on 100% faith-based, touch-screen e-voting machines across the state. There will be no way to determine after the election whether the computers have accurately recorded, or not, the intent of those voters who voted on them. As VerifiedVoting.org summarizes the crucial contest, it "will be essentially unrecountable, unverifiable, and unauditable."
As with South Carolina's primary, so so long ago, and other states since, whatever the officials tell you at the end of the election, is what you, and we, will have to accept. Whether votes are counted accurately is completely out of anybody's hands at this point. It's strictly Democracy of the Gods...
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5916
FUN FACTS...
And 15 percent erroneously think Obama's a Muslim, thanks in part to disinformation widely spread on the Internet, and hinted at by Republicans, the media, and hillary.
One in Three Returning Vets Suffer from Brain Injuries, Mental Health Problems
“Achieving the 15% (Bush) goal (to replace 15% of domestic gasolinewith biofuels in 10 years) would require the entire current U. S. corn crop, which represents a whopping 40% of the world's corn supply.”
-- Colin Carter, Ph.D., UC-Davis on the ethanol scam that will lead to more poverty, more emissions, and the waste of billions in taxpayer dollars that could go to ACTUAL climate change solutions
VIDEO SECTION
Olbermann suggests 8 questions for stephanapoulous to ask McCain…classic:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/keith-olbermann-gives-stephanopoulos-some-questions-to-ask-of-mccain/
This is absolutely awesome! Watch this white priest defend Rev. Wright in one of those O’Reilly interview ambushes he has his people do. This is EXACTLY how Wright should have been defended from the beginning…rather than everyone throwing him under the bus…you got to see this! Oh, Rev. Wright is doing his first major interview on Thursday, with Moyers! A must see...
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/priest-pwns-bill-oreillys-minion-on-rev-wright/
The great Bill Maher dismantles the mind bending ludicrousness of the whole “elitism” lie…in that, its right wing, super rich and powerful, or religious fundamentalists (the very definition of “elitism”…in their own minds anyway) calling left progressives who fight for economic justice “elitists”! McCain and Bush…the very definition of “elites”…in the negative sense, not in the “elite human beings” sense…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/real-time-with-bill-maher-new-rules-on-being-an-elitist/
Want to hear what a REAL JOURNALIST sounds like? Watch Leila Fadel interviewed by Bill Moyers. She is an unbelievably courageous and skilled journalist (only 26 years old), who is now running the McClatchy news service bureau in Iraq (they are by far the best corporate news group). She also just received the George Polk Award for Foreign Reporting. In this interview she bluntly lays bare all the spin on Iraq and Iran in a way that is all too rare these days.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/21/mcclatchys-leila-fadel-cuts-through-the-bs-on-iraq-and-iran/
DNC’S first ad against McCain…its nice to know Howard Dean is chairman now…this definitely has a Dean feel:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/20/dnc-launches-first-general-election-ad-better-off/
More of Olbermann’s bushed…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/19/countdowns-bushed-best-laid-plans-edition/
Elizabeth Edwards makes the point (perfectly I might add) that I have argued here that Dems need to make against McCain: “If you have guaranteed government funded health coverage, why not all Americans? And likewise, under McCain’s plan, if he wasn’t a senator, he would not have had his cancer surgeries covered…as it would have been a “pre-existing condition”…something I know all too well.
McCain gets asked this question, and his "answer" is very telling...an issue Obama will use in the General to great effect:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/20/this-week-bringing-up-mccains-life-long-federally-provided-health-care-is-a-cheap-shot/
MORE ON THE MCCAIN “ANSWER” TO EDWARDS FACT BASED ASSERTION
Elizabeth responds:
John McCain accused me of taking a "cheap shot" on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" yesterday for noting that people with preexisting conditions, such as he and I have, would not be able to get health care under his plan –- and that he perhaps was not as sensitive to this problem as he should be since he has been in government health care his whole life.
Sen. McCain noted that he was not receiving government health care for the six years he was in captivity. That is true. But it has nothing to do with my point — which is that the problem with Sen. McCain's health care plan is not how it affects us –- but how it affects the tens of millions of Americans with preexisting conditions who, unlike Sen. McCain and myself, do not have the resources to pay for quality health care.
That is not a cheap shot, it is a potentially life and death question for tens of million of Americans. And it is a question Sen. McCain must address.
McCain's health care plan is centered around the idea that we'd be better off if more Americans bought health coverage on their own, rather than receiving it through a job or government program. But maybe since he has never purchased insurance in the individual market, he does not know the challenge it presents for Americans with preexisting conditions.
END
Once again, here is a scandal worthy of non-stop front page media coverage…yet the silence is deafening from our corporatized fourth estate. Why? Well partly its because the media is directly complicit in this one.
From CYL:
Through newly obtained internal documents, The New York Times has uncovered an elaborate PR campaign run by the Pentagon that coached former military officials — or as they're known on television, Serious Independent Military Experts — on how best to shill for Donald Rumsfeld during the fallout from the "General's Revolt," when numerous high-ranking retired Generals broke long standing tradition and began speaking out harshly against the former Secretary and his prosecution of the War in Iraq.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/20/the-new-york-times-exposes-manipulative-dod-propaganda-racket/
Watch Greenwald’s latest documentary short proving that all the crazy attacks on Obama originate at Fox, and then are slowly picked up by the other media outlets…and then parroted ad nausea:
http://alternet.org/blogs/video/82998/
More Colbert on the ABC debate…
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/18/stephen-colbert-praises-abc-for-a-great-debate/
HILLARY ON IRAN...SCARY...
Me: I'd also add something about the debate regarding actual substance. What really frightened me was what Hillary said on Iran, Israel, and the middle east. nothing less than a new imperial presidency.
I mean, creating an "umbrella" in the region, where we get involved militarily in other conflicts? Or that she would "massively respond" to anything Iran does against Israel? Or, that Iran is this big threat, when in fact the NIE has already proven they are not. There's also that pesky little fact that Iran hasn't invaded another country in 400 years - and has no discernible or logical reason for doing so now - yet we are supposed to believe they are going to invade Israel, or threaten us??
She sounded like McCain…and Obama wasn’t much better! He too parroted the lie that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, when in fact, the NIE report already debunked such fallacious claims! This kind of capitalizing to the war machine to not look “weak” is very worrisome to me.
Obama needs to start pointing out the facts about Iran…not the propaganda being pushed by this administration and Israeli fundamentalists! If he continues to do this, it will greatly weaken his hand when, or if, we bomb Iran.
But, I’m glad to say that Olbermann, Maddow, and C&L saw the same thing I did in their answers to the Iran question, particularly Hillary’s rather insane one:
First, C&L:
There was a substantive point during Wednesday’s debate that got missed by many in the deserved outrage over the hackery of the first hour. As I watched the debate, it was the single point at which I was tempted to throw my shoe at the screen, not only at the framing of the question by moderator George Stephanopoulos, but by the answers by Barack Obama and especially, Hillary Clinton. That question was over the issue of Iran. Stephanopoulos prefaced his question with the long-debunked but still oft-repeated neo-con talking point that Iran has threatened Israel and then continued with the assumption that Iran is still pursuing a nuclear program, a factoid directly contradicted by the NIE report the White House famously sought to suppress.
Apparently, the White House was so successful in obfuscating the findings of that NIE report that neither the News Division of a major network, nor the Senators sitting on the Armed Services (Hillary Clinton) or Foreign Relations/Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (Barack Obama), were aware of the findings. Sadly, both were completely comfortable, as Rachel Maddow put it, to further a talking point created by Charles Krauthammer.
Krauthammer is one of the many Neo-con war cheerleaders who has far too influential a reach for someone who has been so completely and utterly wrong on their Middle East plan. Obama, while a little more measured in his speech, did not reject the framing posed to him and said that “all options are on the table.” Clinton all but declared her intention to attack Iran, repeating that we could not allow Iran the right to develop a nuclear program.
A little history lesson for those determined to ignore it: Iran has NEVER attacked another country. Has never threatened to attack another country. The ruling mullahs have found nuclear weapons to be against the teachings of peace in the Koran and in fact, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah put together a foreign policy council to curtail Ahmadinejad’s powers as he has recognized Ahmadinejad’s tendency to be confrontational. I profess no special knowledge of Iran other than what I’ve studied using credible sources. If I can figure this stuff out and sort through the White House spin, what is Obama’s and Clinton’s excuse? I realize that expecting ABC to sort through the spin is more than we can hope from a news organization nowadays.
WATCH OLBERMANN AND MADDOW:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/18/countdown-democratic-debate-fulfilling-neo-con-dreams-for-iran/
CHARLIE GIBSON WAS WRONG in the debate ON CAPITAL GAINS
I so was wondering about this, because his continued claims in the debate about capital gains didn’t seem right to me, but I didn’t have the data to be sure. Just from a logical perspective, his point seemed to be implying a “causal” effect to something that could be completely unrelated.
Here’s CYL’s analysis:
GIBSON Comment: [H]istory shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.
While much of the well-deserved criticism of ABC’s Democratic debate on Wednesday night centered around the dwelling on gotcha questions and smears instead of substantive issues, when they finally did get around to a question that could have been considered a real issue, Charlie Gibson, who has a history of sandbagging Democrats with right-wing disinformation about Bush’s tax cuts, once again loaded up a question, disadvantaging the candidate and misled the millions of people watching:
As Jason Furman explains here, and as Len Burman explains here, the best evidence suggests otherwise. Cutting these taxes may lead to a temporary spike in revenue, because people sell stock to realize gains while rates are low. But over the long term, the biggest owners of stock—the wealthiest Americans—will mostly save what they will save, regardless of fluctuations in the rate.
The Congressional Budget Office notes that “the potentially large difference between the long- and short-term sensitivity of realizations to tax rates can mislead observers into assuming a greater permanent responsiveness than actually exists.”
As Barack Obama correctly alluded to, an article that same day reported that “the top 50 hedge fund managers earned a combined $29 billion in 2007. Five managers earned more than $1 billion.” One of the main reasons they are doing so well while the economy is teetering is that the income derived from stocks is currently being taxed at less than half of the rate of what people who actually work for a living have to pay on their salaries.
Salary in the highest tax bracket is taxed at 35 percent, but profits from stocks held long enough to be called “long-term capital gains” are taxed at 15 percent. A hedge fund manager making $100 million in a year would pay $15 million to the government if he is able to take his income as capital gains, not the $35 million he would have to pay if the income was considered salary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
