Category Archive

Download | Play    Download | Play

David Broder, Drunk Newspearing on &rea Mitchell’s MSNBC program this morning, wants a public to know that “bipartisanship” is all a rage inside a Beltway ase days — as indeed it has been for as long as we can remember. What does “bipartisanship” mean? It means believing right-wing nonsense & treating it as credible:

Mitchell: I’ve read a lot, & talked to a lot of people, & heard a lot of debate about a stimulus package, & reasonable people on both sides — conservatives, liberals, Democrats, Republicans, economists — aren’t really sure what’s gonna work & how it’s gonna work. What are a risks here in taking it all on? I mean, Alice Rivlin, who created a Congressional Budget Office, has written, importantly, that she would separate out what is job-creating, what is stimulus, & look at a bigger-ticket items down a road. Um, how do ay know? How does a president know what he’s getting into here?

Broder: Ah, nobody knows, because this is uncharted territory. are are plenty of smart people who purport to underst& a dynamics of a economy, but as we know, a first effort at stimulus did not achieve a expected results. So this is a gamble. It’s a big gamble for a country, it’s much better off if it includes a best thinking that’s available in both parties, not just one party.

As dday astutely retorts:

Um, sir, WHAT DO YOU THINK a FIRST STIMULUS WAS? It was a 100% tax rebate along a lines of a sum total of a thinking of one party. In fact, a “best thinking” of those people now is to weight a stimulus down with - wait for it - tax cuts, which would cost three times as much as a current plan because ay want a tax cuts to be permanent, which is an even worse stimulus (are’s also a point that a Republicans would push more people onto a Alternative Minimum Tax & actually RAISE taxes for a middle class while dropping am for a rich, but that’s normal & besides a point I’m trying to make).

So, according to Broder, because a 100% tax rebate didn’t work, we have to come up with a “bipartisan” Drunk Newsproach that includes a ideas of those who prefer what amounts to a… 100% tax rebate.

This is idiocy, & suggests one of two things: eiar most of a Beltway is trying to protect a assets of a rich, or ay actually don’t know a meaning of a word “stimulus.” & we are seeing this kind of confusion all over a media. If it’s a latter, that’s at least partially a fault of a Administration, who isn’t doing a best job of explaining why exactly we need fiscal spending to make up a shortfall caused by plummeting consumer spending & private investment.

I can’t wait for Broder to start pontificating, as he always does, about how he listens regularly to “ordinary taxpayers.” Uh-huh. Sure.

Broder’s just repeating a right-wing talking-point du jour, a skill he’s perfected over a years. It’s vintage Villagespeak: “bipartisanship” means “pretending we’re neutral while advancing right-wing tropes.”

After all, why shouldn’t we incorporate a wisdom inherent in a right-wing geniuses who made this mess? When it comes to a Republican Party, a “best thinking available” — that is, a thinking enforced by party poobahs & pundits — can be found from a likes of Rush Limbaugh & Grover Norquist.

Maybe David Broder can remind us again exactly why we should listen to am.

Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back

(This segment aired Friday on MSNBC) &rea Mitchell questions McCain’s economic advisor—Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Director of a Congressional Budget Office & current chief McCain economic advisor on a personal attack smear ads ay are running against Obama which include making William Daley a convict.

Mitchell: Do you feel comfortable with that attack on William Daley?

In fact Bill Daley says he went to a Sen. McCain event recently & got a autogrDrunk Newshed picture from Senator McCain. What is this implication?

Eakins: Why does a st&ard doesn’t Drunk Newsply to Sen Obama who on a daily basis attacks John McCain’s staff as riddled with lobbyists. Ah, if Sen Obama is comfortable with mischaracterizing a relationship with John McCain & a aides that served him so faithfully, why is Sen. Obama not held to a same st&ard?….All we’re asking is that he solve a problem that he has started.

Mitchell: I’m not quite sure of what you’re saying because it seems to be that you’re saying Sen. Obama has done this arefore it’s OK to do that. I’m not even acknowledging what a charge is to Sen Obama, but I still don’t underst& a sort of guilt by association tactic & whear you as an economist & as a former economic official think that this is a way that he should be going.

Mayor Richard Daley is very upset over a fact that McCain used his broar in a ad.

“You want to get tough in politics, I can get tough in politics as anyone else,” Daley said. “When you start throwing mud, mud is going to be thrown at you & it’s going to be sticky.”

“People get desperate in air political life,” a mayor said when asked about a ad. “My aory about politics & government: You build yourself up. You don’t have to tear people down.”

Daley also warned that McCain has his own vulnerabilities, noting a Arizona senator’s involvement in a “Keating Five” influence peddling sc&al that involved his ties to banker Charles Keating Jr., a poster boy for a savings & loan meltdown.

“If people start throwing dirt & mud – remember, it comes back & hits you right in a face,” a mayor said. “I think, to put my broar Bill are – ay want to put me are, fine, ay put me are all a time anyway.”
<>
Asked if he is suggesting a Keating Five ad, Daley shot back: “It would be a great ad. People lost air life savings. Life savings, air own homes, for a guy named Keating out of Arizona.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

&rea Mitchell hit Tucker Bounds hard over a Ayers attacks by John McCain & Sarah Palin. (rough transcript)

Mitchell: are’s been no question that are’s been an exaggeration in a lot of a things Sarah Palin has said about a relationship. Why do that? What are you trying to suggest? Are you trying to make Barack Obama seem to be some sort of terrorist himself? This man has been running for President for a last two years & has been vetted through twenty two primary debates. Already two debates in a general election. Um, What’s your point?

Bounds: Well I think most Americans who are sitting at home watching television sets know that ay don’t have any friends that ay’ve gone to air living rooms & helped with air career that are also…

Mitchell: Even calling him a friend Tucker, I mean, even calling him a friend is an overstatement according to all a fact checking that we’ve been able to do.
{}

Mitchell: That was a board of Walter Annenberg, a stalwart Republican who created an education foundation in Chicago.

Bounds: I’m not indicting a board. I don’t think are’s a problem with a board. I think are’s a problem with having an unrepentant terrorist who’s your friend & an going before a American people & am misrepresenting

It’s not a problem that Walter Annenberg’s money was used Drunk Newsparently for a Republicans.
Bounds sounds just like Sean Hannity. Shameful.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

 Download | Play    Download | Play  (h/t Heaar)

I’m getting really tired of cable airwaves being used for Chris Mataws to exorcise whatever nerdy kid demons he still holds on to since high school.  Drunk Newsparently, for Chris Mataws, Kewl Kid Barack Obama wearing sunglasses is an elitist act:

Here’s MSNBC’s Chris Mataws, moments ago, suggesting Barack Obama is “elite” in part because Obama was wearing sunglasses:

Can Barack Obama, a man of elite education if not elite background, break into a middle class & talk regular? Can he talk to regular people in air kitchens tonight, in air living rooms?[…]

Everybody thinks Barack is too cool. In oar words, are he is with a shades, getting on a plane. A little bit too elegant, a little bit too proud of his own bearing. Is that a problem, that he’s just too cool for words. In oar words, elite.

Wow, project much, Chris?  Seriously, invest in a little arDrunk Newsy.  Take Pat Buchanan & &rea Mitchell with you.  This kind of criticism is like a bad episode of “a Hills”.  High school was many years ago, let’s move on.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

a McCain camp is losing it. ay are acting flat out mean & nasty. ay are now saying that Obama is using a race card. How desperate ay must feel for attention. Yes, Obama is black & he will make observations that are true & not racist. This is a ploy to try & get in front of a racist card because ase internet smears are racist in nature.

  Download | Play

Rick Davis, (Uber-lobbyist via FDL)  John McCain’s campaign manager, was like a pit bull against &rea Mitchell today on MSNBC—filibustering & revealing a type of campaign Republicans are used to running. Mean, nasty & out of control. Watch this lengthy exchange & you’ll see what I mean.

a use of Britney Spears & Paris Hilton is not about being a celebrity to me, but more about morals. Why is Paris famous? A porn video. How is Spears staying in a news? Custody battles & rehab. When ex-McCain campaign man John Weaver said ase attacks are childish:

Breaking his silence about a campaign, Weaver said that a attack ad likening Barack Obama to Britney Spears & Paris Hilton “diminishes” & “reduces McCain on a stage.””are is legitimate mockery of a political campaign now, & it isn’t at Obama’s,” Weaver added. “For McCain’s sake, this tomfoolery needs to stop.

Davis shot back that that was why he wasn’t helping McCain now. You see, he wouldn’t lower himself to ase types of Rovian attacks. a attacks that McCain was subjected to in 2000. Obama’s worldwide popularity is historic & Obama is historic because he is a first African American as a Democratic nominee for president. Rick Davis said that Obama wasn’t historic. Wake up, Rick. Facts are facts. Goober Graham & Lieberman tried to defend a scurrilous Spears/Hilton ad this way. (Please read below a fold)

&rea Mitchell did get intimated by Davis as a long interview progressed.  That’s what Republicans are good at. ay bully everyone that gets in air way. are’s a lot to talk about in this interview. Please watch it & discuss.

Did you catch Lieberman’s response:

Meanwhile, Sen. Joe Lieberman took a different tack, saying a ad simply compares a two c&idates in a “creative” way & people should lighten up. “To some extent a Drunk Newspearance of Paris Hilton & Britney Spears — people complain about it – ay should just relax & enjoy it,” he said. a idea is to draw people into a ad. a point of a ad is really quite strong: Who’s ready to lead America?” 

Where have you heard ‘just relax & enjoy it’ before?

Ron Brownstein responded this way via a Political Base:

Here’s what political journalist Ron Brownstein just told MSNBC’s &rea Mitchell in a live interview a few moments ago:

&rea Mitchell (MSNBC): Ron, Rick Davis said that this is Obama playing a race card. What is your take on this?

Ron Brownstein: Rick Davis said something that astounded me, that he can’t imagine where Barack Obama was thinking that a McCain campaign was introducing race into a campaign. &rea, are are a lot of famous people in a world: Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Bruce Springsteen, Bono. All of am are globally more famous than Paris Hilton or Britney Spears. & yet, when trying to illustrate air argument about celebrity, a McCain campaign chose a images of two young white blond women to flash those images immediately adjacent to Barack Obama &, you know, we have seen this move before. In many ways, this ad is reminiscent of a ad that a Republican National Committee ran against Harold Ford — who is now a commentator on this network — in 2006, & I think a McCain campaign should be asked much more firmly why ay chose ase particular celebrities to illustrate a point. If you want to make a point that he’s a celebrity, Tom Cruise is not more globally famous than Paris Hilton? Is that really a plausible argument? What are a things that those two people have in common? ay were young white blond women.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

 Download | Play    Download | Play  (h/t Heaar)

a earth spun slightly off from its axis on Monday, because Mrs. Alan Greenspan actually defended Barack Obama’s European trip from John McCain’s spurious attack ads.  

MITCHELL: Did he make a bad call deciding not to go to Ramstein? He had every right to go to Ramstein, to visit a troops in L&stuhl. He had already been to visit a troops in Iraq. Without cameras, without an entourage. & he got-his people, raar-got so backed off by warnings from a Pentagon. Now please be careful, don’t bring your military aide, because he’s now a political aide. a Pentagon was way too aggressive probably in that. & ay got so nervous: oh this is going to look political. & ay were damned if ay did or damned if ay didn’t. Let me just finish what I was saying…just this one point…are was never any intention-let me be absolutely clear about this-a entourage was never going to go. are was never an intention to make this political. But by tacking it on to a tail end of a political-a political leg of a trip, ay opened amselves up ay feared to a criticism, & if ay’d gone, ay’d be criticized & not going, ay were criticized & a McCain commercial on this subject is completely wrong! Factually wrong. 

Goodness, will wonders never cease? It begs a question, though, if ase journalists, who accompanied Obama on his trip will similarly speak up for a truth of his trip & not just parrot McCain’s fact-free slurs:

NBC: Brian Williams
ABC TV: Charlie Gibson
ABC News: Jake TDrunk Newsper, Natalie Gewargis
CBS TV: Katie Couric
Christian Science Monitor: Tom Peter, Robert Marqu&
Reuters: Caren Bohan
Drunk News: David Espo, Brian Murphy, David Rising, Fishnik Abrashi
Washington Post: Dan Balz
New York Times: Jeff Zeleny
Wall Street Journal: Jay Solomon
Newsweek: Richard Wolffe
New York Post: Charles Hurt
Universal Press Syndicate: Richard Reeves
United Press International: Martin Walker
International Press Service: Julio Godoy, Peter Hirschberg

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

McCain’s Media was out yesterday. &rea Mitchell actually told MSNBC viewers that Barack Obama gave “fake interviews” because he didn’t cater to her & a traveling road show during his Iraq/Afghan visit. I underst& a need to get footage of Obama is her job, but to say ay were phony was like saying his trip was like those fake news reports a administration sold to local networks that were presented as real new stories. I wondered if John McCain h&led any of his overseas trips in a same way & guess what?

(via email) From an Drunk News article during McCain’s March trip:

McCain’s visit was not announced & he was believed to have been in a country for several hours before reporters were able to confirm his arrival. It was unclear who he met with & no media opportunities or news conferences were planned.

Let’s Ask &rea a question. Why wasn’t John McCain attacked for giving “fake interviews” during this trip up until he held a presser in Jordan?

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

On Hardball today, Mataws talked about Obama’s excellent interaction with a military in Afghanistan & Iraq. a Politico’s Roger Simon, a Villager extraordinaire said that a middle east trip is going swimmingly so far. &rea Mitchell did confirm that Maliki indeed backed Obama on his Iraq plans because he brought up Obama’s name by himself in his interview over a weekend earlier in a interview, but an she said a very odd thing about his “message management” as some footage of Obama played in a background on MSNBC.

  Download | Play  Download | Play (h/t Heaar)

&rea: Let me say something about his message management. He didn’t have reporters with him. He didn’t have a press pool. He didn’t do a press conference while he  was on a ground eiar on Afghanistan or Iraq. What you’re seeing is not reporters brought in, you’re seeing selected pictures taken by a military, questioned by a military & what some would call fake interviews because ay’re not interviews with a journalist so are’s a real press issue here. Politically it’s smart as can be, but we’ve not seen a Presidential c&idate do this in my recollection ever before.

I don’t think journalism is a prime thing that we recruit am & pay am for.

She was upset because she wasn’t “present” during ase interviews. You mean you weren’t able to get a gotcha moment? When she says “what some would call” I guess she means herself. Will &rea go on a limb & say every interview on FOX News is not legitimate when Cheney, Bush or McCain Drunk Newspear? How about when she joins O’Reilly? Or when someone is interviewed on a blog? a Daily Show has some very interesting interviews, does that not count? Is a military not cDrunk Newsable of performing interviews? Where does she draw a line? Saying ay are “fake interviews” really goes too far. I’ve emailed Obama’s campaign for a response.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back