News Corpse Endorses Tea Party Candidate For Indiana Senate

Posted by on May 5, 2012 at 2:24 pm. 1 Comments :

State treasurer Richard Mourdock is challenging veteran Dick Lugar for his senate seat in Indiana. Mourdock is a Tea Party favorite and has been endorsed by Sarah Palin. For those reasons, and the explanation below, News Corpse is jumping on the Mourdock bandwagon.

Richard Mourdock

Lugar is a popular figure in Indiana across the political spectrum and would be a shoe-in for reelection in November. He is seeking his seventh term in the U.S. Senate and is the third most senior member of the body. Were he to win, and if the Republicans gained a majority, Lugar would become the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and third in line for succession to the presidency.

However, Indiana’s Republican primary voters are poised to throw all of that away on an ultra-conservative state pol with a narrow range of support from the Tea Party and right-wing SuperPACs from outside the state. He is presently beating Lugar in recent polls and has a significant financial advantage due to the wealthy PACs who are backing him like the Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity.

The good news is that there are some precedents for his candidacy that point to an outcome that Democratic operatives are excited about. In 2010 there were seven candidates who defeated establishment Republicans in the GOP primaries. All seven were supported by the Tea Party (and most by Sarah Palin). And all seven lost to Democrats in the general election. Some of these seats would have gone easily to the Republican that lost in the primary, and but for that, the GOP might have been in the majority now.

The same scenario is playing out today in Indiana. It would be highly unlikely that Democrat Joe Donnelly would defeat Lugar in the general, but he is running neck and neck with Mourdock in recent polling. So a Mourdock victory on Tuesday represents the Democrats best chance to pick up a senate seat that would otherwise not be in play. And history suggests that Mourdock’s prospects are dim. Just take a look at Christine O’Donnell (DE), Joe Miller (AK), Ken Buck (CO), Linda McMahon (CT), Carl Paladino (NY), Sharron Angle (NV), and Carly Fiorina (CA).

So thanks Mr. Mourdock, and good luck on Tuesday. If you prevail in the primary you will be doing the Democrats a huge favor by opening up an opportunity they hadn’t expected. Even if you win in November, it will be better for Dems because you’ll be a junior member with no seniority and the ill will of your colleagues for having ousted their pal, Lugar.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox Nation Panic: Run For The Hills, The World Is Ending

Posted by on May 5, 2012 at 10:39 am. 2 Comments :

Sell! Sell! Sell! It’s all over. The stock market is collapsing. Wall Street is bankrupt. The economy is toast. Head for your bunker with your gold bullion, guns, and bibles. The End Times are here.

Fox Nation is feverishly reporting that “Stocks Tank, Nasdaq’s Worst Week Of 2012.” If this isn’t evidence of Armageddon, I don’t know what is.

Fox Nation - Stocks Tank

After this horrific market crash the NASDAQ will only be up 13.5% year-to-date – a mere nine times more than what the average bank savings account is earning for the whole year. If you listened to Fox you would have missed out on one of the most precipitous stock rallies in decades.

And when was the last time that Fox reported that the market was significantly higher in any week this year? Good luck finding that report. Fox is on a mission to make President Obama and his administration look bad. That requires trumpeting bad news about the economy and ignoring the good news.

The problem is that by doing that, Fox also exacerbates negativity that can have the effect of producing a self-fulfilling prophecy and frighten people out of the market. But Fox doesn’t care about that. Hurting Obama is more important to Fox than accurately reporting on the economy.


Born And Bred In Brooklyn, U.S.A., They Call Me Adam Yauch But I’m M.C.A.

Posted by on May 4, 2012 at 3:57 pm. NO Comments :

The Beastie Boys may be remembered best for fighting for their right to party. But they were a groundbreaking trio of rockin rappers who cared about music and the world they lived in. Even if it was a World Gone Mad.

Adam Yauch passed away today at the age of 47 after a three year battle with cancer.

R.I.P. M.C.A.


Heartland Institute: Osama Bin Laden Was Pro-Life. Are You?

Posted by on May 4, 2012 at 2:14 pm. 4 Comments :

In the annals of advertising, there are some notorious chapters wherein misguided persons or organizations justified displaying disgusting and hateful images and messages on billboards. However, it will be a long time (I hope) before anyone comes close to sinking as low as the Heartland Institute has done with its new series of advertisements promoting its upcoming anti-environment conference in Chicago.

Heartland Billboard

The Heartland Institute is a far-right think tank that denies the scientific reality of climate change. It is notoriously anti-science and has previously taken positions that rejected claims that tobacco was bad for your health. The reason for their advocacy of the absurd is that they are funded by corporations with vested interests in deceiving the public (i.e. Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil, Pfizer, etc). Additionally, they receive grants from ultra-conservative zealots like the Kochs, Scaifes, Waltons, etc.

This billboard campaign is particularly repulsive in that it associates honest and clear thinking advocates for the environment with some of the most horrific creatures of crimes and atrocities. In addition to the Unabomber, the Heartland’s campaign features Charles Manson and Osama Bin Laden. The argument they are making is that these monsters believed in climate change and therefore you are also a monster if you believe in it. That is not an implied interpretation. It is what they say explicitly in their own justification:

“These rogues and villains were chosen because they made public statements about how man-made global warming is a crisis and how mankind must take immediate and drastic actions to stop it.” […]

“Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the ‘mainstream’ media, and liberal politicians say about global warming. […]

“The point is that believing in global warming is not ‘mainstream,’ smart, or sophisticated. In fact, it is just the opposite of those things. […]

“The people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society. This is why the most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.”

Aside from being grossly insulting, the Heartlanders are 100% wrong. The vast majority of scientists, climatologists, and other experts agree that climate change is occurring and that human activity is at the very least a significant contributor. There is no dispute among reputable scientists. The only dispute comes from conservative politicians, pundits, and researchers working for the corporations profiting from the destruction of the planet’s ecosystem.

The tactic of recruiting murderers and madmen for this campaign disparages all of the sincere people who are fighting for a better, cleaner, healthier world. But it also opens the door to reciprocal attacks on the Heartlanders. For instance:

Heartland Billboard

That’s right. Osama Bin Laden, Timothy McVeigh, Scott Roeder, Eric Rudolph, and others, were all anti-abortion extremists and terrorists. Does that mean that all pro-life activists can be lumped together with these despicable characters just because…

“…what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the [National Right to Life Committee], journalists for the ‘mainstream’ media, and [conservative] politicians say about [abortion]?”

See how easy this is? Hitler was anti-union. Stalin opposed gay marriage. Anders Breivik hated Marxism. I could go on. The obvious conclusion is that conservative principles inspire mass murderers, right?

The propaganda purveyors at the Heartland Institute have demonstrated that they are not a serious organization whose opinion matters to people who truly care about this issue. The media ought not to provide a platform for their views and politicians who associate themselves with this group should be asked whether they endorse the hate mongering that flows from these phony Heartlanders. There is simply no room in the debate for this sort of irresponsible rhetoric. Especially when it comes from an enterprise that has been lying about the substance of the matter for years.


Fox Nation vs. Reality: Quoting Castro Quoting Obama

Posted by on May 3, 2012 at 7:32 pm. 7 Comments :

After a week of Fox News fabulists going bonkers over President Obama’s use of the word “Forward” and declaring that he was a socialist because of it (never mind that Fox also used it their promos), we now have Fox Nation publishing a piece that aligns Obama with Fidel Castro:

Fox Nation - Castro

Not surprisingly, there is very little in that headline that is true. Obama did not “rip” the United States, he did not “compliment” Cuba, and there is no evidence that he ever said anything remotely similar to that “quote” to any visitor. The one thing that the Fox Nationalists got right is that Castro said something.

What happened is that Fox Nation’s editors found an article by Kyle Olson of the Education Action Group. EAG is a far-right, Koch-funded cell of anti-unionists in Michigan. Olson pulled a quote from a column by Castro that was published on Counterpunch.org. In that article Castro bragged about Cuba’s beneficial relationship with allies like Venezuela, and added…

“President Obama knows this only too well and has talked about it with some of his visitors. He candidly told one of them: ‘The problem is that the United States sends soldiers while Cuba, however, sends doctors.’“

Castro doesn’t say when, where, or to whom, Obama allegedly said this. There is no record of any visitor that was ever told any such thing, or how Castro would have heard about it. Did some mysterious visitor rush back to his hotel, get Cuba on the line and beam “Hey Fidel, guess what Barack just told me?” However, it is certainly a useful and self-serving tale for Castro to weave.

But let’s set aside all of those points, that suggest that this whole thing is a hoax, and just examine the substance of the quote. There have been plenty of discussions about foreign policy strategies that weigh the benefits of military aid and humanitarian aid. The question of whether the U.S. should seek to strengthen it’s relations with other countries by sending doctors or soldiers is one that is reasonable and proper. It is neither a rip nor a compliment. It is simply good diplomacy to analyze and arrive at an effective balance.

Clearly the editors at Fox Nation have bought into the story as they posted Castro’s quote as if it were fact. It’s ironic, and more than a little unpatriotic, that they put more faith in what Castro says than their own president. If one didn’t know better it would appear that the Fox Nationalists are cozying up to the communist dictator who they obviously regard as a truthful source. Perhaps Rep. Allen West, who is so anxious about the possibility of communists in congress, should look into whether Fox is secretly harboring traitors in their newsroom.

It is also interesting to note the graphic that the Fox Nationalists chose to accompany their article. I’m sure they innocently selected a photo of Obama applauding in front of a banner that says “CUBA.” Certainly they would have had no intention of conveying any message that the President supported the communist state. And it’s surely not relevant that another angle of the same event reveals that Obama was speaking at a conference of the Cuban American National Foundation, an anti-Castro group based in Miami:

Obama Cuban American


Fox News Hypocritically Attacks Obama’s Fundraisers While Ignoring Romney’s

Posted by on May 2, 2012 at 3:00 pm. 5 Comments :

On Monday fox News published a report that purported to unveil “a veritable army” of fundraisers working on behalf of President Obama’s reelection. The focus of the article was a practice known as bundling where supporters solicit their family, friends, and colleagues, to make a contribution to a candidate’s campaign. Bundlers can accumulate large amounts of total donations but each of the contributors is bound by the standard contribution limit of $2,500.

The article on Fox was headlined “Meet the bundlers: Obama’s fundraising team a who’s who of Hollywood, media,” and began by saying…

“Bundlers are the original movers and shakers in the world of high-dollar campaign fundraising. And President Obama’s reelection machine has enlisted a veritable army of them — a roster that includes some of the biggest names in media and show business.

“Among them are entertainment magnate Tyler Perry, actress Eva Longoria, DreamWorks CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg and Vogue editor Anna Wintour. It’s just not Hollywood backing the president — Comcast executive David Cohen, as well as lawyers and finance titans from Goldman Sachs, Barclays Capital and other firms help complete the list of hundreds.”

It should be noted that every contributor who donates $250 or more is subject to disclosure rules. The bundlers themselves are not. We know who is bundling for Obama because his campaign discloses their names, which Mitt Romney refuses to do. The only Romney bundlers who are known are registered lobbyists whom the law requires be disclosed. That’s why the OpenSecrets listing of Obama Bundlers shows 532 names while the list of Romney’s bundlers shows only 22. And, of course, all of Romney’s bundlers on his list are lobbyists. We have no idea how many other bundlers are working in Romney’s behalf. Obama has no lobbyists bundling for his campaign.

The primary point of the Fox News article is that Obama has a large number of bundlers, many of whom are in the entertainment industry. Had Fox bothered to do just a modicum of research they would have discovered that only 25 (6%) of Obama’s bundlers are from Hollywood. What’s more, the implied criticism of bundling ignores the fact that the donors are actually disclosed, while contributions from corporations and billionaires to SuperPACs are are not. So there is transparency of bundling donations that does not exist with the SuperPACs that are a much bigger part of Romney’s operations.

The problem with Fox’s analysis is that they can’t compare Obama’s fundraising to Romney’s because of Romney’s obsessive secrecy. Romney may have many more bundlers than Obama, we just don’t know. He may also have an army of Hollywood elitists bundling for him, we just don’t know that either. The only thing we know is that Romeny does rely heavily on lobbyists while Obama has none acting as bundlers. So Fox is being overtly hypocritical by criticizing Obama while letting Romney off the hook.

If Fox had conducted the necessary research to be able to make appropriate comparisons, this might have been an interesting article. But since Romney’s campaign keeps everyone in the dark, perhaps that should have been the lede. What this article tells us about Obama is useless without comparative data for Romney, but the fact that Obama is forthcoming about his finances and Romney is not would have been the real story for any legitimate news enterprise. Of course the qualification of “legitimate news enterprise” automatically rules out Fox.

Another aspect of the hypocrisy of Fox is that just a few days ago they were complaining bitterly about an Obama web site that identified a few of Romney’s big money backers. Fox characterized this as akin to the Nixon enemies list or McCarthyism. The comparison was ludicrous and utterly detached from reality. But it’s interesting that now Fox thinks it’s perfectly alright to disclose the names of Obama supporters without raising questions about Nixonian or McCarthyite paranoia. Just another example of the doubly standardized hypocrisy that Fox has developed into an art form.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Mitt Romney’s Campaign Slogan: We’re Not Stupid

Posted by on May 2, 2012 at 1:10 pm. 6 Comments :

This week there has been a swirling mini-controversy surrounding the use of the word “Forward” in a new web video posted on Barack Obama’s campaign site. The Right-Wing Noise Machine sprung into action to assert that there was some sort of connection between that word and its use by socialist groups over a hundred years ago.

Of course the word has been used by innumerable organizations that sought only to convey a sense of progress and a positive vision of the future. It is the official slogan of the state of Wisconsin. It is part of the registered servicemark (Reagan Forward) of the Ronald Reagan Society at his alma mater, Eureka College. It was even used by Fox News in on-air promos that shouted “Move Forward.”

What has been ignored in this discussion is what the campaign of Mitt Romney was using for their slogan. Well, I went to his web site and found this:

Mitt Romney - We're Not Stupid

So there you have it. Romney’s campaign slogan is “We’re Not Stupid.” It’s safe to say that this slogan is not in use by any other organization. How many other organizations actually need to remind their supporters that they aren’t idiots?

Tea PartyThe Romney strategists are wisely tackling head-on a serious concern within their constituency. After all, the Tea Party is a major part of the GOP base. Remember the Tea Party? They were the ones disrupting town halls. They were the ones carrying signs that said “Keep government’s hands off my Medicare.” They were the ones who revered the intellectual prowess of Glenn Beck, Herman Cain, and Sarah Palin.

But this is no time to dwell on your flaws. This is the time to proudly display your declaration of non-stupidity. It’s a call to arms that will reverberate throughout the campaign season. Chant this slogan at your rallies. The more you say it, the more people will be forced to consider the message of your insistent affirmation. And while Obama’s supporters are mumbling their Marxist mantras about moving the nation forward, you can stay focused on the one thing that your candidate thinks should be highlighted in these troubled times.

It’s a bold strategy, to be sure. By so forcefully rejecting the stupid, Romney risks alienating one of the biggest and most reliable segments of his GOP base. But apparently the Romney campaign is convinced that it’s a worthwhile risk.

So march forward, I mean ahead, Romneyites. And be sure to ask everyone you know, for the next six months “Are ya votin for Romney?” But don’t be surprised if all they say in response is “We’re not stupid.”


The Swiftboating Of Obama Begins

Posted by on May 2, 2012 at 10:36 am. 12 Comments :

In 2004 the campaign for president was tarnished by a band buttheads who thought that it would be appropriate to smear the military record of a decorated veteran who risked his life in Vietnam (John Kerry), in order to support a frat boy who evaded combat by leaning on the connections of his famous family (George W. Bush).

The Swiftboat Veterans for Truth launched a well-financed campaign of distortions and lies in order to prevent Kerry from gaining any popular support for his service to the country. And now a similar campaign has begun by a shadowy group called “Veterans for a Strong America” to deny President Obama any credit for his role in finding and killing Osama Bin Laden.

This video is brazenly dishonest in its portrayal of Obama as negligent in praising the efforts of all of those who had a role in Bin Laden’s demise. Obama has repeatedly and effusively honored everyone from foot soldiers to intelligence operatives to diplomats to civilians to the Navy SEALs, etc. There is abundant evidence of that praise had the liars responsible for this video cared to review it. Instead they chose slap together some deliberately deceitful soundbites of the President speaking in the first person.

As usual, it took the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart to set the record straight. He not only shames the producers of the video above by demonstrating how easy it is to be honest, he also makes the undeniable point that any politician would seek and expect some credit for having orchestrated this sort of dangerous mission and seeing it through to success.

Part One:

Part Two:

Republicans would like to steal every speck of gratitude that the President deserves for having been in charge of this operation. They seem to think that the SEALS planned, executed, and gave themselves the order to proceed without any intervention from the Commander-in-Chief. They also seem to believe that the order was a foregone conclusion that anyone would have made in similar circumstances. However, we know that that is untrue because Mitt Romney said specifically that he would not have chased Bin Laden into Pakistan and he criticized Obama for proposing it.

In 2004 there were, unfortunately, way too many gullible people who fell for the fallacies of the Swiftboat Liars. Hopefully that will not be the case today. President Obama was not solely responsible for determining Bin Laden’s fate. He knows that and says so frequently. But he did play an important role and is entitled to list it on his resume.


Bill O’Reilly And Jesse Watters Lie About Van Jones

Posted by on May 2, 2012 at 2:23 am. 8 Comments :

Bill O'ReillyLast week Bill O’Reilly interviewed his Fox News colleague Jesse Watters about a video Watters had produced wherein he ambushed Van Jones at a green energy convention. The video itself was a frivolous exercise that succeeded mainly in demonstrating how easy it was for Jones to make Watters look foolish.

More interesting was a part of the exchange between O’Reilly and Watters that included a wholly unfounded attribution by Watters that even O’Reilly found unbelievable:

Watters: He [Van Jones] actually said that the EPA has saved more lives than the department of defense and that Republicans want to poison children.
O’Reilly: Jones said that Republicans want to poison children?
Watters: Yes, he did.
O’Reilly: Was there any reason that the GOP wants to commit homicide?
Watters: Jobs. Poisoning children creates jobs.
O’Reilly: Now wait a minute. This guy was working in the Obama administration. He actually said that the GOP wants to poison children?
Watters: We have it on tape.
O’Reilly: Alright. I want to see that tape on Reality Check on Monday.
Watters: OK.

Well, Monday came and went and there was no video. O’Reilly broadcast his Reality Check segment on Tuesday and there was no video. It should come as no surprise that O’Reilly failed to air the video and didn’t even bother to address the fact that he was breaking his promise to do so. The reason for that is simple: There is no video of Jones saying what Watters alleged he said.

The truth is that Jones never said that Republicans “want to poison children.” He responded to accusations that the EPA kills jobs by noting that the EPA actually saves tens of thousands of lives every year by controlling toxic emissions and pollution. Jones suggested that critics be asked “How many American children are you willing to poison per job?” It was a speculative question meant to stimulate discussion about the relative merits of environmental regulation, not an indictment of the GOP as wannabe children poisoners.

This is yet another example of Fox News making irresponsible and dishonest allegations and failing to back them up with evidence. These phony “journalists” have no problem shamelessly making false statements publicly and then simply letting the whole matter drop and hoping their glassy-eyed audience forgets the part where they promised to provide proof. And judging from the non-reaction from the Fox audience, forgetting is something they do willingly.


Romney Derangement Syndrome Introduced By Fox News

Posted by on May 1, 2012 at 2:52 pm. 10 Comments :

Today fox News added Mitt Romney to the list of “Derangement” syndromes that have entered the vernacular. That in itself is not particularly noteworthy. The syndrome meme has been gaining popularity and has been attached to virtually every major political figure at one time or another.

What’s of note here is that this decidedly partisan expression was not coined by a Fox News opinion commentator and it did not appear on Fox Nation. It was authored by Chris Stirewalt, the politics editor for Fox News Digital: “Obama Suffers From Early Onset Romney Derangement Syndrome.”

Fox News Romney Derangement

The article addresses the phony controversy stirred up by Fox over whether Obama had politicized the killing of Osama Bin Laden by referencing it in a web video that enumerated some of the President’s accomplishments in office. It would be impossible to draw up such a list without including the Bin Laden episode, but the right wants to forbid the President from getting any credit for his role in accomplishing something his predecessor failed to do for seven years. Here is an excerpt from the article that Fox News considers to be “fair and balanced:”

“[M]aking a nakedly partisan attack surrounding the best military moment in a long time looks grubby and un-presidential. It makes the other things Obama is doing to capitalize on the killing – nuzzling Brian Williams in the Situation Room, etc. – go from eyebrow raising to just plain yucky.”

Does that sound like a hard news treatment of current events? To be clear, Fox News has an opinion section on their web site, but this article was not in it. They presented this brazenly biased screed as actual news. And what’s worse, Fox is completely wrong on the facts of the matter. Romney actually did criticize Obama for saying that he would pursue Bin Laden, even into Pakistan, and that if Pakistan would not act, he would. Romney responded by saying that he disagreed with Obama’s remarks and that he (Romney) would not violate the sovereignty of our Pakistani allies. Therefore, Romney would not have killed Bin Laden under the circumstances that Obama was faced with, despite the fact that he now says he would have done so.

If anyone is politicizing this affair it’s Romney. He is twisting the President’s representation of events and misquoting himself. It’s a classic case of Monday morning Commander-in-Chiefing.