Media Matters Enters The Liars Den At CPAC – Gets Ambushed By Breitbart

Posted by on March 17, 2013 at 3:47 am. 4 Comments :

Yesterday a panel at CPAC (which I believe stands for Conniving Propagandists And Crooks) was held following the screening of “Hating Breitbart,” a crockumentary glorifying the late Andrew Breitbart. The topic of the event was “The Uninvited,” a reference to fringe conservatives who are allegedly kept from appearing in the mainstream media. Participating on the panel were several Breitbart-affiliated folks, including the disgraced video mangler, James O’Keefe, and a lone representative of Media Matters, Ari Rabin-Havt.

In the course of the discussion (video below) O’Keefe protested that he felt he was “held to a higher standard than any Pulitzer Prize winner.” Whereupon, BreitBrat editor Larry O’Conner defended O’Keefe by rejecting the notion that just because O’Keefe’s videos were found to have been deceptively edited that “everything O’Keefe does should be considered a fraud.” Actually, that’s precisely what should be done when someone has proven he’s a fraud on multiple occasions.

The discussion eventually veered off into an attack on Media Matters with O’Conner questioning the veracity of their content. When Rabin-Havt began to defend himself, in what seemed to be a transparently staged tossing of the baton, O’Conner recognized Breitbart’s Editor in Chief Joel Pollak in the audience and asked him to weigh in on the subject.

Pollak was visibly upset at what he characterized as a smear directed at him by Media Matters. He cited an article that he claimed accused him of being a birther. Standing in the audience he pointed his finger at Rabin-Havt and arrogantly insisted that “The next word out of your mouth should be ‘Sorry.'” But that was just a small portion of the generalized indictment he made of Media Matters:

Pollak: There’s a Media Matters method, it’s this: You make a statement in the headline that is not proven in the article. The lefties to whom you sell your material, or distribute your material, don’t care about the proof, they care about the headline. So you put in that headline that I’m a birther even though you admit I’m not a birther.

Alright, let’s break this down. First of all, Pollak’s assertion that Media Matters makes unproven statements in their headlines is itself unproven. Media Matters is meticulous about documenting what they publish, and the “lefties” and others who read it care very much that thoroughness. As for the article Pollak referenced, it was posted on Media Matters on March 13, with the title “What The Media Need To Know About CPAC 2013.” Notice that there is nothing in the headline about anyone being birther and that Pollak isn’t in it at all. So much for his thesis that Media Matters composes false headlines and fails to back them up.

Ironically, Pollak’s complaint applies perfectly to his own article on Breitbart News that Media Matters was writing about in the first place. That article’s headline was “The Vetting – Exclusive – Obama’s Literary Agent in 1991 Booklet: ‘Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii'”

Breitbart News

From the wording of that headline it would not be much of a stretch to conclude that the article was advancing birtherism by questioning Obama’s birthplace. Pollak said that he only intended to make a point that Obama, or his representatives, altered his biography when it suited him. However, that was not the inference in his headline. And it could be said of Breitbart what they said of Media Matters – that they “don’t care about the proof, they care about the headline.” What’s more, the first paragraph of the article began by affirming the birtherism in the headline:

“Breitbart News has obtained a promotional booklet produced in 1991 by Barack Obama’s then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, which touts Obama as ‘born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.'”

To be fair, there was a “Note from Senior Management” appended to the top of Pollak’s article that asserted that “Andrew Breitbart was never a ‘Birther,’ and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of ‘Birtherism.'” The fact that that note was necessary is telling in itself. But it’s a rather hollow disclaimer when the headline and the opening paragraph seemingly contradict it. Pollak also wrote that “The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate.” That’s true, but as Rabin-Havt pointed out, he had not called Pollak a birther. He had simply asserted that Pollak and Breitbart were still responsible for advancing the birther theme even if they themselves did not subscribe to it. And they did that by publishing articles with misleading headlines and expecting to absolve themselves of the birther taint by rejecting it several paragraphs later.

This bit of theatrics staged by the BreitBrats fits nicely into their modus operandi. It is the sort of ambush that Breitbart himself would have enjoyed pulling off. And it even starred Breitbart’s budding video propagandist, little Jimmy O’Keefe. But once again, when the facts are revealed in full, their deceit is all too apparent. The Media Matters article did not call Pollak a birther in the headline. Although Breitbart’s article did question Obama’s birthplace in their headline.

So the BreitBrats got together and conspired to ambush Rabin-Havt with a false accusation that he had done what the BreitBrats actually did do. And then they complain when nobody will take them seriously, and they wonder why they are “The Uninvited” and why everyone hates Breitbart.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Sarah Palin At CPAC: Todd Got The Rifle, I’ve Got The Rack (Teat Party?)

Posted by on March 16, 2013 at 11:02 am. 4 Comments :

The long awaited appearance of Tea Party Queen Sarah Palin at the Conservative Political Action Conference finally went off this morning with a speech that the CPACers gobbled up voraciously. However, as might have been expected by more coherent observers, Palin’s remarks never addressed much of substance.

The entirety of Palin’s Obama bashing and wingnut homilies was broadcast live by Fox News, who didn’t bother to air any of Mitt Romney’s speech yesterday. That should tell you something about Fox News that you probably already knew.

Perhaps the biggest applause line of the speech was after she regaled the crowd with an amusing joke about her boobs. That’s right, her BOOBS! And if you wonder how she worked that into the monologue, it was with reference to the Second Amendment. Still wondering? While extolling the joys of gun ownership, Palin told a story wherein her romantic hubby Todd gave her a gun rack for Christmas. In return, she gave him a shiny new gun. Whereupon she delivered the hilarious punch line: He got the rifle, I’ve got the rack. And the crowd goes wild.

Sarah Palin

The only other notable quote from her insomnia-curing oratory was a rather ironic jab at President Obama. She said that “We don’t have leadership coming out of Washington. We have reality television.”

Sarah Palin

What’s more she opined that it was bad reality television. Well…..I guess she should know it when she sees it.

[Update] Here’s the video:


CPAC So Far: The Conservative Miscreant Conference Doesn’t Disappoint

Posted by on March 15, 2013 at 1:22 pm. 5 Comments :

In the first two days of the Conservative Political Action Conference, the right-wingnut contingent was out in force and was not holding back on their animus and denial. They still believe that the reasons for their losing are related to poor messaging, not poor messages. So even with the highest rated cable news network blasting their propaganda 24/7, and polls showing that the American people overwhelmingly prefer the solutions advanced by Democrats, Republicans continue to cling to ideas that have been soundly rejected by voters.

That is, of course, good news for Democrats and President Obama. The more that rightist stars shine their light on absurdities and overt hatred, the more people will be repulsed and gravitate toward the left. Some examples of the tone-deaf rhetoric emanating from the CPAC ballrooms include these utterances from their heroes:

Donald Trump is very unhappy that the social safety net, that he and the right would love to see unravel, cannot be loosened without sacrificing votes:

Donald Trump

Allen West, the guy who says there are 70 card-carrying communists in congress, also thinks that his battle against his ideological opponents on the left is analogous to fighting terrorists.

Allen West

And Marco Rubio doesn’t want to be perceived as a bigot just because he holds bigoted views:

Marco Rubio

It is that sort of demented rancor expressed by these GOP Tea-holics that is keeping the party from corralling any support, particularly from minorities and young voters. Yet after throwing such temper tantrums, whose only purpose is to malign their perceived enemies, they persist in the delusion that their policy prescription is fine and it’s just their media, and in some cases their candidate selection, that is flawed.

No matter what they say about their presentation of conservatism, they had a fair shot with “severely conservative” Mitt Romney, and they lost. They had the most powerful name in media at their back, and they lost. The 2012 election pitted Obama against a right-wing onslaught that hit every plank in the far-right platform, and they lost badly. [Note: Although MSNBC and CNN both aired Romney’s CPAC speech live, Fox News ignored it entirely]

CPAC is doing precisely what it was intended to do: Spotlight the cream of the rightist crop. They cannot whine about deficient messaging when this is the all-star roster they themselves put on the field. The only problem that conservatives have is that their ideas are stuck in an archaic past, and they didn’t even work then. When they realize that and begin to adopt sensible policies that the American people favor, they might win back some support. But as things stand today, they are stubbornly holding fast to outdated and unpopular schemes designed to benefit the rich. And judging from the performances at CPAC, they don’t plan to change their grating tune.


MSNBC Moving Ed Schultz To The Weekend – Chris Hayes Gets His Spot In Primetime

Posted by on March 14, 2013 at 8:39 am. 6 Comments :

On last night’s broadcast of the The Ed Show, Ed Schultz announced that he would be taking his program to a new weekend slot beginning in April. Thursday will be his last broadcast in primetime. His statement came at the end of the program and said in part…

Schultz: “I raised my hand for this assignment for a number of personal and professional reasons. My fight on ‘The Ed Show’ has been for the workers and the middle class. This new time slot will give me the opportunity to produce and focus on stories that I care about and are important to American families and American workers.”

His statement implies that the move was his choice. However, there are some conflicting accounts of this and a report in the New York Times last November speculated that Schultz’s time slot might be offered to MSNBC contributor and frequent fill-in host, Ezra Klein.

As it turns out, it will be Chris Hayes taking over Schultz’s time period. Hayes is editor-at-large for the highly respected Nation magazine and is currently a host of a weekend morning program on MSNBC, “UP with Chris Hayes.” His selection affirms the appeal he has generated on his show and as a guest host for Rachel Maddow and others.

While the change for Schultz appears to be a demotion from primetime to the weekend ghetto, the details of the move may suggest some benefits. His new show will air on both Saturday and Sunday from 5:00 to 7:00pm. This means that his new show will be twice as long as the old one. You can do a lot more in a two hour format if you’re creative with segments, field production, and guests. And he will end up having nearly as much weekly time as he had before the move.

Cable News RatingsSchultz’s ratings were growing at a steady pace, although he was no match for Fox’s number one program, The O’Reilly Factor. At the end of last year he posted a 54% gain compared to O’Reilly’s 22% decline. Then again in January he scored a plus 23% to O’Reilly’s minus 25%, as Fox sunk to a twelve year low.

Last year I proposed some programming changes for MSNBC that would assist them in taking advantage of their post-election ratings surge. One of those was to give Schultz the Hardball repeat at 7:00pm and find another host to put up against O’Reilly and anchor the primetime block. Hayes was a possibility at the time, but not my choice. He is a smart and engaging host, but not the sort of personality that could compete with O’Reilly. If MSNBC is interested in taking the leap from contender to champ they need to take some risks.

One possibility would have been to develop a non-conventional format with a team of hosts. My suggestion was John Fugelsang and Joy Reid. They could produce a show that incorporated serious policy discussion along with a sense of humor and a nod to popular culture. That might have been an effective way to counter-program Fox and set up the evening’s later programs with something lighter and more broadly appealing. Perhaps MSNBC will consider such a program to replace Hayes on weekend mornings where they may be more comfortable experimenting.

As with everything in the television business, time will tell. MSNBC has been enjoying substantial gains lately, while Fox News has been suffering severe losses. Whether these trends will continue long enough for the networks to swap places in the standings remains to be seen. And CNN isn’t standing still either with their new boss, Jeff Zucker, whose influence is already being felt in significant ways. The end result is that 2013 is bound to be a year wherein the cable news business suffers the ancient Chinese curse of “living in interesting times.”


Fox Nation vs. Reality: On Obama’s Budget The Balancing Of

Posted by on March 13, 2013 at 11:04 am. 1 Comments :

It’s not bad enough that Fox News operates a community web site that is riddled with lies, but they also frequently demonstrate a level of incompetence that would embarrass a remedial high school newspaper.

Fox Nation

Perhaps I’m being too hard them. Maybe their syntax here was meant to compliment Obama by portraying him as having the wisdom of Yoda. Or maybe they hired Sarah Palin to write their headlines. Or, of course, they may just be emulating their racist perception of Ebonics. In any case, the gist of their article is incontestably false.

The Fox Nationalists are characterizing Obama’s remarks as a rejection of the goal of balancing the federal budget. Now, that would be a perfectly reasonable position to take because in a recession many economists argue that economic growth has a higher priority than balanced budgets. However, it is not the position that Obama is taking,. In the interview Obama gave to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos he very clearly articulated his interest in balancing the budget:

“Balancing the budget in part depends on how fast you grow. You remember– you were in the Clinton administration. The reason that you guys balanced it was a combination of some tax hikes, some spending cuts, and the economy grew.

“And, so– you know, my goal is not to chase– a balanced budget just for the sake of balance. My goal is how do we grow the economy, put people back to work, and if we do that we’re gonna be bringing in more revenue. If we’ve controlled spending and we’ve got a smart entitlement package, then potentially what you have is balance. But it’s not balance on the backs of, you know, the poor, the elderly, students who need student loans, families who’ve got disabled kids. That’s not the right way to balance our budget.”

Any fair reading of that statement would recognize that the President is focusing on balancing the budget, but doing it in a way that is compassionate, intelligent, and doesn’t make America’s less fortunate shoulder the burden for the wealthy. It most definitely is not Obama saying that his budget won’t be balanced (or be won’t balanced either). This is just another example of Fox misrepresenting the facts in order to whip their ill-informed audience into a frenzy over a fabricated controversy.


The Tea Party Times? Rumors Swirling About The Koch Brothers Buying The Tribune Comapany

Posted by on March 13, 2013 at 4:26 am. NO Comments :

Newspaper wires are buzzing over a report by the L.A. Weekly that billionaire oil magnates and Tea Party financiers David and Charles Koch are interested in buying the Los Angeles Times or even its parent corporation, the Tribune Company. Tribune owns the Times as well as the Chicago Tribune, the Baltimore Sun, and some 20 television stations.

On the surface this might appear to be an ominous development that would put a number of influential media assets in the hands of some notoriously self-serving political manipulators. The prospect of the plutocratic Koch clan assuming control of a network of media properties that they could convert into clarions for their Tea Party fronted campaign to expand their wealth and power is worthy of some concern. However, a deeper examination of this will take the sting off of it.

First of all, the Tribune newspapers are not exactly journalistic powerhouses that break major stories or shape public opinion. To the contrary, they are mere shells of their former glory having cut their editorial staffs to the bone which, not surprisingly, has resulted in a downward spiral in circulation. And if the Koch brothers were to assert their ultra-conservative political ideology on newspapers in liberal enclaves like L.A. and Chicago they are not likely to find many new subscribers.

This brings us to the question of whether an acquisition by the Kochs would represent any change in ideology at all. The Tribune Company was already a right-wing enterprise that published papers with editorial positions that conflicted bitterly with the majority of their constituents. The current CEO of Tribune is a former News Corp executive. Until 2008 the L.A. Times had never endorsed a Democrat for president. And, in a particularly telling and shameful action, the Times fired columnist Robert Scheer, a thirty year veteran with the paper and a Pulitzer Prize winner, and replaced him with Jonah Goldberg, a dimwitted conservative hack with no journalism credibility. So contrary to conventional wisdom, these media operations were not bastions of liberalism.

MurdochalypseThe Tribune rumors have added to speculation about the company’s future that has also included gossip about Rupert Murdoch as a potential buyer. News consumers in the cities affected must be excited about the prospect of having their hometown papers run by the man responsible for hacking into the phones of hundreds of people including a murdered schoolgirl. However, all of this chatter ignores some fairly steep obstacles for both parties. Despite their wide-ranging conglomerate, the Kochs have no experience with media companies. And as noted above, the specific entities available with Tribune would not be very helpful to their propaganda mission. Murdoch would likely be unable to close a deal due to his current ownership of TV stations and newspapers in the same markets. A Tribune acquisition would violate FCC rules (for which he has already received waivers) and would initiate a long and difficult approval process.

Given the impediments to the deals by these famous suitors, one wonders where the rumors might have come from. The most obvious source would be from within Tribune itself. They may be trying to create the illusion that there is acquisition interest in the company and its assets in order to stir up potential buyers and artificially inflate its value as it emerges from bankruptcy. That’s a more likely scenario than one wherein either Murdoch or the Kochs actually bid on the company.

If either of these rumored suitors actually did acquire all or part of Tribune, it would be a sad day for journalism, but only on a symbolic level. Seeing any media property with the history of these enterprises become so embarrassingly intertwined with Tea Party nutjobs would be unfortunate and disheartening. But on practical terms it really wouldn’t result in any observable change considering how stridently conservative and deeply ineffectual these properties have become in recent years. What is truly sad is just the fact that the papers have already fallen to such appalling depths that these rumored acquisitions by disreputable characters bent on deception wouldn’t really make any difference at all.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

CPAC: The Conservative Political Action Conference Sets Its Sights On The Future?

Posted by on March 12, 2013 at 12:11 pm. 3 Comments :

This year’s Conservative Political Action Conference begins Thursday and promises to be a treasure trove of comedy material that will give a big boost to Democrats and progressives.

CPAC 2013

Having learned nothing whatsoever from the 2012 election, CPAC has dubbed this year’s event “America’s Future: The Next Generation of Conservatives.” Then they loaded up the schedule with fresh-faced Tea-publicans like Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Mitch McConnell, Newt Gingrich, Allen West, Rick Santorum, and Donald Trump. Even Dick Morris is making an appearance. It’s a blast forward in time all the way to 2008 which, for the GOP, actually seems like the future since they are still acting as if it’s 1808.

If the allocation of speaking time for CPAC’s illustrious guests is any indication, they are firmly endorsing the backwards views of the conservative movement’s most moth-eaten mouthpieces. Palin and Trump, for instance, have been allocated 16 minutes and 14 minutes respectively. However, rising starlet Marco Rubio is getting only 11 minutes. That’s still better than Chris Christie who has been allotted zero minutes since he wasn’t even invited to attend. Not to worry though, there will be plenty to keep attendees occupied, including tributes to Andrew Breitbart and Ronald Reagan, and highly anticipated sessions with the NRA and the Tea Party.

What’s more, the tenor of the event is holding fast to the antiquated notions of Armageddon that were such a prominent part of the past four years of fear mongering. The conference is jam-packed with thrilling and frightful seminars like “Should We Shoot All the Consultants Now?,” “Are We Back on the Road to Serfdom?,” “Stop THIS: Threats, Harrassment, Intimidation, Slander, and Bullying from the Obama Administration,” “The United Nations vs. the United States: the End Run Around the American Way of Life,” and “Is America Coming Apart?.” I can’t wait to hear the answers to those questions.

Adding to the gaiety (bad choice of words?) of this ultra-modern affair is the dress code distributed by a media strategist in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Fashion, being one of the things for which right-wingers are best known, is not neglected this year. That’s why they are nixing T-shirts, jeans, sneakers, miniskirts, strapless necklines, halter tops, Uggs, Tom’s Shoes, leggings, and fancy shorts. See the colorful Infographic.

This is shaping up to be the most exciting CPAC yet. So stay tuned for updates from the speeches and panels that are surely going to advance the cause of conservatism into the nineteenth century.


Breitbart “News” Duped By Same Satirical Site They Blasted WaPo For Believing

Posted by on March 11, 2013 at 11:29 am. 3 Comments :

It is becoming evermore inescapable that Breitbart “News” is run by the dumbest bunch of pseudo-journalists ever to disgrace the profession. Just a couple of weeks after freaking out over an alleged association between then-Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel and the Freinds of Hamas (a terrorist group that, it turns out, does not exist), the BreitBrats are at it again.

Breitbart - Krugman

Media Matters caught Breitbart editor-at-large, Larry O’Connor, posting an article (now deleted) that claimed that Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman had filed for bankruptcy. It was a juicy story for a conservative rag that would like nothing better than to discredit one of the shining lights of progressive media – a columnist for the New York Times no less.

Unfortunately for O’Conner, the story was utterly false. In fact, it was the work of The Daily Currant, a satirical web site. The thought of doing any actual reporting never entered into the minds of the BreitBrats or they would have quickly discerned that the article was a comical fake.

What makes this even more embarrassing is that just last month O’Conner’s fellow BreitBrat, John Nolte, went to great lengths to slam the Washington Post for having fallen for an article from the same site. Nolte’s pompous critique made some points that apply perfectly to O’Conner. He lambasted the WaPo author saying that…

Nolte: If [Suzy] Parker had a shred of self-awareness, integrity, and dignity, she would have changed the headline to “Too Good To Check,” and under it posted an essay about how shallow, smug, bitterly angry partisanship can blind you to common sense.

What part of that doesn’t reflect precisely the predicament in which O’Conner now finds himself? And why did the Breitbart site simply delete the phony article rather than adding a correction (which WaPo did) and an essay about angry partisanship and common sense. It should also be noted that the erroneous item on WaPo’s site was posted by a guest blogger not employed by WaPo, while the Breitbart screw up was by an editor.

The magnitude of hypocrisy here is off the scales. Breitbart never took responsibility for the phony Hamas story. They also never reported at all that their one-time Golden boy, James O’Keefe, had settled litigation against him for $100,000 in a case where he smeared an ACORN employee. And now they quietly sweep their brazen incompetence under the rug despite having made such a fuss about a similar recent situation.

Nevertheless, Breitbart’s site is still highly regarded in conservative circles, including Fox News, who frequently republish their tripe. It simply cannot be said enough that this is how right-wingers have become the most ignorant and misinformed people in America.


Rand Paul’s Tea-publican Hero-Worship And The Vacancy Of The Stupid Party

Posted by on March 9, 2013 at 1:05 pm. 14 Comments :

This past week saw an unusual amount of media attention focused on a singularly non-newsworthy event. The big story of the week involved a United States senator who droned on interminably without ever saying anything of much substance. That’s about as significant a news item as a plane landing safely in clear weather. In fact, it’s pretty much what every senator does every day.

Rand Paul

However, for some reason, Rand Paul’s soliloquy has captured the attention of the press and an adoring congregation of conservative true-believers. The beatific praise that Paul has garnered exceeds that of nearly every other right-wing idol competing for the limelight. Here is some of what is being said about him since his solo outing:

  • Sen. Rand Paul: Filibuster was victory and blow for freedom
  • Rand Paul’s shot heard ’round the world
  • Rand Paul’s Filibuster: ‘A Stroke of Political Genius’
  • Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky performed a national service
  • Rand Paul’s ‘Epic’ Filibuster
  • New leader of the GOP: Rand Paul
  • Rand Paul, a civil liberties hero
  • Rand Paul’s Filibuster Proves He is the Future of the Republican Party
  • Rand Paul’s filibuster was ‘completely awesome’
  • The Rand Paul Moment Has Arrived
  • Rand Paul filibuster energizes Tea Party against GOP establishment
  • The World Stands With Rand Paul For Nearly 13 Hours
  • Rand Paul a ‘constitutional hero’ for Brennan filibuster

That’s a lot of glory for the dubious achievement of not shutting one’s mouth for thirteen hours. The filibuster was premised on a fallacy having to do with paranoid fears of President Obama advocating a drone strike program in America. There has never been any suggestion of that and when PolitiFact checked into the validity of the charge they rated it false.

Nevertheless, Paul persisted in his quixotic endeavor for a purpose that cannot be fathomed. He succeeded only in tying up the senate for a couple of days when there are numerous other critical matters to be resolved. And the specific matter that he was holding up, the nomination of John Brennan as CIA Director, was completed just a few hours after Paul’s filibuster ended with a successful confirmation.

The underlying issue of military drones is a serious matter and deserves discussion. In fact, there are probably areas in which the left and right will agree with regard to their use and abuse. But Paul’s stunt did nothing to further that discussion. To the contrary, it inhibited it because no conversation other than his monologue could take place while he held the floor.

What is not particularly surprising is the affection sent his way for this carnival side show. The GOP is famous for showering plaudits on their most inane spokespersons. They create heroes out of nitwits with nothing to offer but bluster and venom. During the Republican primaries last year there were fleeting leads for questionable characters like Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Donald Trump, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich. They all had temporary moments in the sun when they were regarded as the second coming of conservatism. And they all receded back into relative obscurity after the sunlight exposed their all too apparent shortcomings.

The same sort of ephemeral adulation was offered to one-time objects of idolatry like Sarah Palin, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, and Bobby Jindal. They too have lost some or all of their luster. But they represent exactly the same values that are now propping up Rand Paul. Values that have the shallowest basis for admiration. It is nonsense like “death panels,” and birth certificates, and legitimate rape, and electrified border fences, and denial of climate change and evolution, and prohibitions against gay marriage and reproductive choice, that has driven the GOP to its lowest levels of support in decades. It is why Gov. Jindal has castigated his Republican colleagues saying that they have to stop being the “Stupid Party.”

That’s a tall order for a party that has made ignorance a plank in their platform. For that reason it is hard to imagine that Paul’s celebrity will last any longer than any of the other briefly revered rightists. Either a newer, more stridently conservative contestant will supersede him, or he will say or do something that will turn the applause into jeers. And it doesn’t take much, as Gov. Christie learned when he toured the hurricane damage in New Jersey with the President. As a tactical gesture, Obama could deep six Paul’s presidential aspirations by simply proposing legislation that prohibits the use of drones in the U.S. against citizens who are not engaged in combat or treasonous activities. As soon as Paul endorses anything supported by this president his hopes for higher office will be dashed for ever.

As bad as this environment is for Republicans seeking to attain relevance, it is equally disturbing that the media is so easily seduced by the most trivial actions. Paul’s stint as rodeo clown produced nothing he can brag about. He delayed more important matters, ran his mouth off, and preened for press photos. At least Jimmy Stewart’s “Mr. Smith” kept going until he was in near physical collapse. Paul, on the other hand, only quit because his bladder gave out. That’s not a particularly dramatic ending for the historians who will be composing the account of this episode. Just imagine if Patrick Henry was immortalized for having bravely demanded, “Give me liberty or let me pee.”


James O’Keefe Agrees To Pay $100,000 To Former ACORN Employee [Update w/O’Keefe Statement]

Posted by on March 8, 2013 at 11:41 am. NO Comments :

James O'KeefeHaving already been convicted of criminal activity in Louisiana, recidivist law-breaker James O’Keefe is now shelling out a hundred grand to one of his victims in the notorious ACORN affair.

ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera was surreptitiously videotaped (for which criminal charges are still pending) and falsely portrayed as offering assistance to O’Keefe’s phony endeavor to transport underage girls from El Salvador for the purpose of prostitution. Unbeknownst to O’Keefe, Vera had notified the police after his encounter with O’Keefe. But O’Keefe posted his fraudulent and heavily edited videotapes anyway with the help of Andrew Breitbart. It will be interesting to see how Breitbart News covers this breaking story – if they do so at all.

This is yet another vindication for ACORN, which has never been found to be guilty of any wrongdoing throughout the trumped up scandal that led to its demise. And it is further evidence that O’Keefe is a disreputable scumbag with no respect for journalism and no personal integrity. This civil litigation defeat is well-deserved and it ensures that the money O’Keefe swindles from his ignorant donors will be put to better use.

[Update] O’Keefe has posted a statement on his settlement agreement that typically denies responsibility and blames others. He calls the $100,000 “the cost of exposing the truth,” and insists that he “will not be deterred from investigating and exposing corruption.” Of course, that statement conflicts with the one he agreed to in court documents wherein he said that he “regrets any pain suffered by Mr. Vera or his family.” How can he be genuinely remorseful while saying that the “ridiculous lawsuit” consists of “meritless accusations?” What’s more, it is absurd to characterize a $100,000 payout as a nuisance suit. Two or three grand maybe, but a hundred large is real money that only the guilty fork over.

Clearly O’Keefe is an unprincipled and deceitful weasel whose word is worthless. And his equally disreputable cohorts at Breitbart and Fox have not even bothered to report the news of this settlement 24 hours later.