Rove In 2004: Influence Of ‘Billionaires Who Write The Checks Give Me Some Concern’
Last night on NBC’s Nightly News, Michael Isikoff reported that a network of special interest money led by Karl Rove is “expecting to raise $250 million to flood the airwaves in these last few weeks of the election.” Rove has been able to raise all of this money from millionaires and billionaires by promising them anonymity.
In 2004, Rove benefited from a similar avalanche of outside money in his quest to help secure President Bush’s re-election. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were funded in part by Texas homebuilder Bob Perry, who is now funding Rove’s new group. The Swift Boat group, which operated as a 527, received over $20 million in donations to air television ads that smeared the war record of Sen. John Kerry (D-MA).
After the 2004 election concluded, Rove was asked how he felt about the impact of outside groups spending millions of dollars to shape the outcome of elections. Echoing a line offered by many Democrats today, Rove said the potential for a few wealthy contributors to tip the electoral balance was a concern and could potentially undermine democracy:
Rove said the 527s — named for the section of the tax code they are formed under — potentially undermine democracy by allowing a few wealthy individuals to spend tens of millions of dollars under less stringent disclosure requirements than before campaign laws were overhauled more than two years ago. These groups, first exploited by Democrats and later joined by Republicans, existed because of a huge loophole in the new law.
Democratic donors, led by at least $27 million from billionaire George Soros, funded such anti-Bush groups as America Coming Together and the Media Fund. Republican leaders originally thought these groups would be prohibited by the Federal Election Commission but when they were not, GOP activists joined the 527 parade late in the campaign. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which ran ads attacking Kerry’s Vietnam War service and anti-war activities, were the most notable of these groups on Bush’s side.
Rove condemned them all.
“I am a firm believer in strong (political) parties, and things that weaken the parties and place the outcome of elections in the hands of billionaires who can write checks and political consultants who can get themselves hired by billionaires who write the checks, give me some concern,” Rove said.
Of course, these days Rove isn’t as big a believer in strong political parties, as he works to build a “shadow RNC.” He also isn’t as concerned about the subversion of democracy at the hands of a few wealthy donors. Instead, when President Obama makes the argument that Rove did in 2004, the Rove of 2010 slams him for having an “enemies list” and engaging in a “desperate political ploy.”
- Comments
- View Comments
After Chamber Spends Big On His Behalf, Mike Kelly Announces Support For Corporate Tax Loopholes
After Chamber Spends Big On His Behalf, Mike Kelly Announces Support For Corporate Tax Loopholes
ThinkProgress filed this report from Meadville, PA.
Last night, Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D) and Mike Kelly (R) sparred for 70 minutes in a debate held at Allegheny College. One of the major issues raised was the abundance of outside expenditures in Pennsylvania’s third congressional district, largely in support of Kelly and against Dahlkemper. Indeed, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has spent approximately $250,000 attacking Dahlkemper on Kelly’s behalf.
It is little surprise then that when asked about his vision for the role of government, Kelly vehemently defended tax loopholes for corporations that outsource American jobs, an issue near-and-dear to the Chamber’s heart. Despite the fact that over 12,000 jobs in PA-03 have been shipped overseas since 1994, Kelly gave his full-throated support for corporate tax loopholes that encourage outsourcing:
MODERATOR: I have a simple question, but it’s very direct. What do you believe the role of government is? [...]
KELLY: I would say the role of government is to [inaudible]. I really think that when we talk about what’s happening in this country, a government – and I really mean this because this is the problem – a government that is so overregulating, so intrusive, so overtaxing. And then by the same token, you say, “well, we just want to eliminate the tax loopholes.” Why do you think these businesses are leaving this country? They’re being penalized to stay here! We have to level the playing field. [...]
Watch here (Kelly begins at 0:44):
Dahlkemper, who has been on the receiving end of the Chamber’s attack ads, was incensed that the group could play such a major role in the race without disclosing its sources of funding, especially after it was revealed that some of that money comes from foreign companies. The congresswoman decried the fact that “foreign interests [were] trying to influence our elections” and called for an FEC investigation into the Chamber’s funding. Dahlkemper is joined by many others who support a formal investigation, including Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), Reps. Steve Driehaus (D-OH) and Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), and OH-18 GOP nominee Bob Gibbs. Watch it:
Juan Williams Admits His Fear Of Muslims On Airplanes Is Irrational
A lot of media noise has resulted from news that NPR fired Juan Williams for making a bigoted remark that he gets “worried” and “nervous” when he sees Muslims in their “garb” on airplanes. Williams’ defenders have blown the issue way out of proportion, with some falsely claiming he was either taken out of context or that the situation somehow mirrors Andrew Breitbart’s gross mischaracterization of comments made by former USDA employee Shirley Sherrod, a comparison that, as Media Matters noted, “just doesn’t make sense.”
In fact, Williams stood by his remark while discussing his sacking on Fox News yesterday. He complained that he got fired for being honest and that his comments were not bigoted. But what seems to be getting lost in the clamor is that — regardless of the intent of Williams’ conversation about Muslims — his comments about Muslims on airplanes are misplaced and bigoted. As the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent correctly observed, “The problem…is that in his initial comments he didn’t clarify that the instinctual feeling itself is irrational and ungrounded, and something folks need to battle against internally whenever it rears its head.” But today on ABC’s Good Morning America, Williams finally acknowledged that his comments were indeed “irrational”:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I guess some people are wondering, should you have gone the extra step and said, “Listen, they’re irrational, they are feelings I fight?”
WILLIAMS: Yeah, I could have done that. In fact, I think it’s very important to sort of parse this. What I said was, that if I’m at the gate at an airport and I see people who are in Muslim garb who are first and foremost identifying themselves as Muslims and in the aftermath of 9/11, I am taken aback, I have a moment of fear and it is visceral, it’s a feeling and I don’t say, “I’m not getting on the plane.” I don’t say, “You must go through additional security.” I don’t say I want to discriminate against these people, no such thing occurs. So to me, it was admitting that I have this notion, this feeling in the immediate moment.
Watch it:
Last night, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow cut through the distorted media chatter on Williams’ firing to put it in the right context. Maddow noted that targeting Muslims “has been a Fox News specialty for a long time now,” and that the other important side of this story is that Fox News handsomely rewarded Williams with a $2 million contract for his Islamophobia. (Ironically, in abetting O’Reilly’s conspiracy theory that George Soros may have been behind his firing at NPR, Williams said, “Money talks. He is a puppeteer.”)
Maddow then knocked down the right-wing canard that Wiliams’ free speech rights have been violated:
MADDOW: Let’s be clear here. This is not a First Amendment issue. … The First Amendment does not guarantee you a paid job as a commentator to say what you want. Your employment as a person paid to speak is at the pleasure of your employer. In this case, it displeased Juan Williams’ employer, at least one of them, for him to have reassured the Fox News audience he too is afraid of Muslims on airplanes and that’s not a bigoted thing. … And so, Juan Williams lost that job. This is not a First Amendment issue. This is an issue of what your employer is OK with.
Watch the segment:
Read more about the story behind Juan Williams firing in today’s Progress Report.
Republican House Candidate Calls For Violent Government Overthrow If GOP Loses Election
Republican House Candidate Calls For Violent Government Overthrow If GOP Loses Election
Stephen Broden, a “constitutionalist pastor” from Texas who won the Republican nomination for Texas’ 30th Congressional District, made a vaguely threatening statement at a Tea Party event last year. He described the federal government as “tyrannical” and said that “we have a constitutional remedy. And the Framers say if that don’t work, revolution.”
Yesterday, a political reporter for WFAA in Dallas-Fort Worth asked Broden to explain whether he was actually calling for violence against the federal government. After a “prolonged back-and-forth,” Broden said a violent overthrow is “on the table”:
“If the government is not producing the results or has become destructive to the ends of our liberties, we have a right to get rid of that government and to get rid of it by any means necessary,” Broden said, adding the nation was founded on a violent revolt against Britain’s King George III.
Watson asked if violence would be in option in 2010, under the current government.
“The option is on the table. I don’t think that we should remove anything from the table as it relates to our liberties and our freedoms,” Broden said, without elaborating. “However, it is not the first option.”
Watch it:
Broden’s comments were chastised by local Republican officials, but they continue to endorse his run for office. Jonathan Neerman, head of the Dallas County Republican Party, said “it is a disappointing, isolated incident,” and that he planned to “discuss” it with the campaign. Ken Emanuelson, a leading tea party organizer in Dallas, said he did not disagree with the “philosophical point” that people had the right to resist a tyrannical government, but added, “do I see our government today anywhere close to that point? No, I don’t.”
Republicans and the national press already made a great deal of commotion over this race, when Broden’s opponent, Eddie Bernice Johnson, became involved in a scandal over the distribution of scholarship money. Broden’s stunning comments seem to deserve at least as much attention.
Running For Congress On Opposition To ‘Failed’ Stimulus, Tim Walberg Acknowledges His Son Got A Stimulus Job
Running For Congress On Opposition To ‘Failed’ Stimulus, Tim Walberg Acknowledges His Son Got A Stimulus Job
Former Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI), who is running for Congress against incumbent Rep. Mark Schauer (D-MI), has campaigned by attacking the stimulus as a failure. Walberg has claimed the stimulus only killed jobs, and claimed that funds were spent on “socially conscious puppet shows” instead of infrastructure. As Political Correction noted, the puppet show claim is absolutely false. But Walberg has debunked his own claim that the stimulus failed to create jobs in a public forum he attended early in September. Speaking with community members, Walberg acknowledged that his son is employed by a contractor doing projects funded by the stimulus. Walberg’s son is among the 3 million people who gained jobs through the stimulus:
WALBERG: My son works for a cement-cutting contractor. They’re getting some overtime now. You know why? Because of the stimulus, doing government contracts. My son makes $10-an-hour, but when he works on a government contract, he makes $28-an-hour.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: It’s always been that way.
Watch it:
This week, the Center for Public Integrity released an explosive report detailing how dozens of lawmakers, including Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), privately requested hundreds of millions of dollars of stimulus money for their districts. The report added increased scrutiny to the stimulus hypocrisy first highlighted by ThinkProgress. While Walberg was not in Congress to request extra stimulus money, his family certainly benefited from a program his campaign pegs as a failure.
ThinkFast: October 22, 2010
ThinkFast: October 22, 2010
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) responded to the latest revelations about the millions of dollars behind the Chamber political attack ads. “They give new meaning to the term ‘Buy American’…they want to buy these elections,” she said on MSNBC. “[I]f they were to win, it would mean that we are now…a plutocracy and oligarchy. Whatever these few wealthy, secret, unlimited sources of money are can control our entire agenda.”
NBC’s Michael Isikoff reported last night that Karl Rove’s coalition of right-wing groups is “expected to raise as much as $250 million.” Most of this money “is coming from big fat cat donor” and undisclosed “secret money pouring into American elections,” Isikoff said, adding that “many $20 million-plus checks have come in from hedge fund moguls and other big business executives.”
Vice President Joe Biden told Bloomberg’s Al Hunt that he has been “amazed” by the amount of money flowing into outside campaign groups advertising against Democratic candidates. The only thing preventing Democrats from maintaining a majority in the House “is how much impact” the outside secret money has, Biden said.
Reintroducing a tactic used during the anti-ACORN spectacle, radical right-wing Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) said he plans to introduce a bill in Congress today that would defund NPR in the wake of Juan Williams’ firing.
Rep. Darrell Issa, who would become chairman of the House Oversight Committee if Republicans regain the majority, accused President Obama of “playing faster and looser with the rules” than former Republican President Bush. And yet, Issa maintains he “won’t pepper the Obama White House with subpoenas and showboat hearings.”
The Obama administration will refuse to train or equip a group of Pakistani military units found to have been involved in human rights abuses. “I told the White House that I have real concerns about the Pakistani military’s actions, and I’m not going to close my eyes to it because of our national interests in Pakistan,” said Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT), who wrote a law requiring ending aid to military units that abuse human rights.
Adding to the legal confusion surrounding the status of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Defense Secretary Robert Gates issued a directive yesterday “that appeared to be a near moratorium on discharges of openly gay service members.” The memo stated that only five top civilian DOD officials will have authority to approve DADT discharges “until further notice.”
“College seniors who graduated in 2009 had an average of $24,000 in student loan debt, up 6 percent from 2008,” according to data collected by the Project on Student Debt. The unemployment rate for “college graduates ages 20 to 24 was 8.7 percent in 2009 — the highest annual rate on record and a substantial rise from 5.8 percent in 2008.”
The FBI is investigating a toxic substance that was mailed to the office of Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), the co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus. Staffers found the envelope containing the powder and two hand-drawn swastikas; this is the third security issue at Grijalva’s office this year.
And finally: Responding to a right-wing ad by Citizens Against Government Waste claiming America’s financial future is owned by China, Campus Progress has created a remixed version of the spot, mocking the xenophobia of the original and pointing out some inconvenient truths.
ThinkProgress is hiring! Details here.
Polluter-Funded Groups Spending Almost $70 Million On Anti-Clean Energy Ads
Polluter-Funded Groups Spending Almost $70 Million On Anti-Clean Energy Ads
Amid an unprecedented surge in mostly secret money into this year’s election campaign, a new report released yesterday by the Center for American Progress Action Fund details how 13 right-wing groups — including large secret money groups like American Crossroads, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and American Action Network — have spent more than $68.5 million this year on “misleading and fictitious televisions ads designed to shape midterm elections and advance their anti-clean energy reform agenda.” In addition to the anti-clean energy ads polluting our airwaves, an earlier CAPAF report outlined an astonishing $242 million in spending on lobbying by the 20 biggest oil, mining, and electric utility companies.
The New York Times reports this evening that “nearly half” of the Chamber’s $149 million in contributions in 2008 came from just 45 donors. (The Chamber claims to have 300,000 members.) “Many of those large donations coincided with lobbying or political campaigns that potentially affected the donors.”
With no end in sight to such dramatic spending in order to protect polluters’ profits, a new ThinkProgress exposé published yesterday suggests that the level of coordination between secret money political groups, ultra-rich conservative donors, and polluters may be even deeper than previously thought. ThinkProgress obtained a memo detailing a secretive gathering held by the Koch brothers this past June, at which the Koch brothers plotted their 2010 election strategy with 210 attendees from the oil industry, coal companies, health insurers, banks, right-wing media (including Glenn Beck), the U.S. Chamber, and others. The June meeting was merely the latest in a series of similar gatherings held twice annually by the Kochs in order to coordinate the funding of the conservative infrastructure of front groups, political campaigns, think tanks, media outlets and other anti-government efforts.
The list of attendees obtained by ThinkProgress shows that there is considerable overlap between the groups that have been running tens of millions in anti-clean energy ads and those who attended the Koch confab, including:
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce: The Chamber has run more than $3.8 million in energy-related ads in eight states, the bulk of which came after its Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer David Chavern attended the Koch meeting.
- American Petroleum Institute: API and a variety of Koch-funded entities teamed up for the past two summers to launch anti-clean energy tours across the country. What’s more, one of the Koch meeting’s attendees, Karen Wright of the Ariel Corporation, was a speaker at an API-Koch-backed September rally in Canton, Ohio, where she questioned the science of global warming and attacked clean energy jobs. The Koch gathering was also attended by more than a dozen figures in the oil, gas, and energy industries, including inviduals affiliated with API members Fluor Corporation, BHP Billiton (via its BHP Petroleum subsidiary), Devon Energy, True Oil, and the aforementioned Ariel Corporation.
- Americans for Prosperity: AFP, which is of course itself a front group for the Koch brothers, has run more than $1 million worth of energy ads. In addition to its inherent ties to the Kochtopus, AFP officials Jeff Crank and Phil Kerpen attended the meeting.
- Yes on 23: The ballot campaign to derail California’s clean energy law has spent more than $1 million on energy ads, after receiving a $1 million donation from a Koch subsidiary and considerable additional support from Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity.
- American Action Network: The secret money group has spent a little under $175,000 on energy ads (though is flooding the airwaves with tens of millions more in other advertising) is chaired by “unethical” Nixon operative Fred Malek, who attended the Koch gathering.
- American Crossroads GPS: The Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie-fathered secret money group rents space to American Action Network and Rove and Gillespie regularly coordinate with AAN’s Malek. Crossroads GPS has spent just over half a million dollars on energy ads, but it and its sister Super PAC, American Crossroads, are expected to spend some $65 million on this year’s election.
- American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity: The well-known and scandal-plagued coal industry front group has spent over $16 million on energy ads this year. Executives from two of its member companies—Alpha Coal Sales Company (a subsidiary of Alpha Natural Resources) and Alliance Resource Partners were in attendance at the gathering.
- Club for Growth Action: The anti-tax group has spent just over $1 million on energy ads. John Childs, who attended the meeting, donates to the Club for Growth and is on its Leadership Council.
Having spent almost $70 million on energy ads this year (and much, much more on other political attack ads), successfully derailed national climate legislation, and launched a war against the Clean Air Act, it’s clear that this secretive group of plutocrats, polluters, and other corporate special interests will have much to do discuss at their next gathering — to be held in January at a resort in sunny Palm Springs.
Prominent O’Donnell Backer Has Extremist Ties, Believes Obama Isn’t An American
Prominent O’Donnell Backer Has Extremist Ties, Believes Obama Isn’t An American
Reuters has a story today about Tea Party-backed Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell’s fundraising, noting that almost all of her support among GOP donors has dried up. The story notes that, failing that support, “the mainstays of O’Donnell’s campaign appear to be local activists associated with the Tea Party movement.” In particular, a group called the 9-12 Patriots and its leader, Russ Murphy, are generating significant support for O’Donnell’s campaign.
During her primary night victory speech, the 9-12 Patriots were the first group O’Donnell thanked, saying “I can‘t thank everyone by name because we would be here until midnight….but I specifically want to thank the 9/12 Patriots for laying the foundation and stirring things up in Delaware.” After her speech, she invited Murphy up to the podium to speak, gave him a hug, and told the crowd: “You’ve got to hear the story about how he started the 9-12 Patriots.” Watch it:
Murphy went on to talk about Karl Rove, but he did not share with the audience or the cameras his views on President Obama — that he believes Obama is not a U.S. citizen, and did not even win the popular vote in the 2008 presidential election. For his book “The Backlash,” author Will Bunch “traveled America looking for the heart of the so-called Tea Party movement” and interviewed members, and sat down with Murphy and two “lieutenants” in the 9-12 Patriots. They explained their opposition to Obama:
The trio led me through a long and mostly fact-free explanation of how Obama only won in 2008 because of the Electoral College, and they even tried to deny his 100,000-vote landslide win in Delaware, finally telling me it was only because of “the handout people” in Wilmington, with its large minority population. Murphy went further, telling me that Obama is “not American” and insisting he hasn’t presented “the documentation” to prove he’s eligible to be commander in chief. The second factor that empowered their movement was the blend of news and misinformation they receive from the popular Fox News Channel and especially from Glenn Beck, whose televised call for the creation of a 9-12 movement is what inspired Murphy to launch his band of “patriots.”
In September, the blog Political Chili outlined some of Murphy’s views that are even more disturbing. He was a “delegate” to the “Continental Congress” held in St. Charles, Illinois in November 2009. The “Articles of Freedom” the delegates produced there called for, among other things, abolition of the Department of Homeland Security, the establishment of 50 state militias, and they declared that President Obama “was not born on U.S. soil” and called for the U.S. Congress to investigate the “citizenship status of the President,” with impeachment as an eventual recourse.
As Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center reported, the “Continental Congress” documents implied violence against the government, saying that “any infringement on the people’s liberty as laid out in the Constitution is ‘an act of WAR’ that ‘the People and their Militias have the Right and Duty to repel.’”
O’Donnells open embrace of Murphy has not yet been questioned by the national or local press in Delaware, but his involvement in the “Continental Congress” and his views on President Obama are disturbing and deserve further scrutiny.
GOP Candidate Hartzler Wants ‘Government To Leave Us Alone’ Yet Has Taken $774,325 In Federal Subsidies
GOP Candidate Hartzler Wants ‘Government To Leave Us Alone’ Yet Has Taken $774,325 In Federal Subsidies
Yesterday, GOP congressional candidate Vicky Hartzler, who is angling to replace Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO), appeared on conservative Mark Levin’s radio show. Levin probed Hartzler’s view on a variety of issues, including why she, the owner of a small farm business with her husband, wanted to run against Skelton.
Hartzler explained that she’s a “lifelong farmer and a small town girl” and that she decided to run for Congress to get the government off her back. “We just want the government to leave us alone here in Missouri’s 4th,” she told Levin:
LEVIN: Now, tell us a little bit about yourself.
HARTZLER: Sure, I’m just one of the people of the 4th district, lifelong farmer and a small town girl, went to school here my whole life. My husband and I are small business owners. We sell farm equipment, we have three stores. I was a teacher for several years, was a state rep for six years, a wife and a mom. We just want the government to leave us alone here in Missouri’s 4th.
Listen to it:
The problem with Hartzler’s self-righteous invocation for the government to “leave us alone,” is that it has done anything but that with her farm business. According to data collected by the Environmental Working Group, Hartzler and her husband’s farm outside Harrisonville, Missouri, has “received $774,325 in federal subsidies from 1995 to 2009.”
On Hartzler’s campaign website, these subsidies aren’t listed anywhere. On the page dealing with agriculture, the candidate explains that “agriculture is a large part of my life, and that it is vital that our farmers and ranchers have a level playing field as they market their products world wide. They should be able to pass on the farming legacy without the devastating death tax and be able to operate without onerous government regulations.” Yet it appears that Hartzler is completely fine with taking hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to operate the aforementioned farms.
GOP House Candidate Keith Rothfus Threatens To Defund Supreme Court Decisions (Updated)
GOP House Candidate Keith Rothfus Threatens To Defund Supreme Court Decisions (Updated)
ThinkProgress filed this report from Cranberry Township, PA.
Yesterday, Keith Rothfus, the Republican nominee in Pennsylvania’s 4th congressional district, attended a house party in Cranberry Township and discussed his political views for about an hour. At first, he echoed the views of most GOP candidates: if Republicans don’t succeed in repealing the new health care law, they would take the unprecedented step to defund the reforms. Rothfus was categorical in his opposition to supporting any aspect of the law, pledging that he “will not fund one Obamacare office.”
However, Rothfus took his defund-mantra a step further. When asked by a constituent whether or not Congress can override the Supreme Court, Rothfus argued that Congress could simply strip funding from the Supreme Court if it makes a decision he disagrees with. Said Rothfus, “if the Supreme Court rules you have to do something, we’ll just take away funding for it”:
CONSTITUENT: Keith, I have a question concerning the courts. It seems that the courts are having the final say on these matters, the Supreme Court. But isn’t it the Congress that can ultimately override the Supreme Court, the checks and balances?
ROTHFUS: Yeah, there are different checks and balances you can do. Congress’s ultimate weapon is funding. If the Supreme Court rules you have to do something, we’ll just take away funding for it. You can always pass a constitutional amendment. I myself have several amendments I’m thinking of. One is to tell the Supreme Court that when you consider American constitutional principles, American constitutional rights, you cannot rely on foreign law to adjudicate those. We have certain members of the Court who want to draw from Europe, and draw from Europe, Europe, and Europe. They’ll never want to draw from Saudi Arabia or something. They talk about these international evolving standards of decency, and they’re always talking about western Europe, which is dying. They want to incorporate really socialist principles into our constitutional regime.
Listen here:
Juan Williams Stands By His Claim That He Has ‘Anxiety’ When He Sees Muslims On Airplanes
Juan Williams Stands By His Claim That He Has ‘Anxiety’ When He Sees Muslims On Airplanes
News broke last night that NPR fired Juan Williams for saying this week on Fox News that he gets “nervous” and “worried” around Muslims on airplanes. Many media figures and right-wing blogs are incensed, charging that Williams has been taken out of context. Today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, co-host Willie Geist complained that “We live in a culture now…where context doesn’t matter…where you can yank a quote out” and “don’t tell the rest of the story.” Co-host Joe Scarborough concurred. “He was setting it up to say, ‘Listen I understand people get nervous, sometimes I get nervous, but we’ve got to move past that.’”
Responding to his firing today on Fox News, Williams stood by his original comments. He said he was trying to tell host Bill O’Reilly that Americans have “to make sure we don’t have any outbreak of bigotry” but that “there’s a reality” you “cannot ignore” that 9/11 was connected to Islamic radicalism:
WILLIAMS: Wednesday afternoon, I got a message on my cell phone from Ellen Weiss who is the head of news at NPR asking me to call. When I called back, she said, “What did you say, what did you mean to say?” And I said, “I said what I meant to say” which is that it’s an honest experience that went on in an airport and I see people who are in Muslim garb who identify themselves as first and foremost as Muslims, I do a double take. I have a moment of anxiety or fear given what happened on 9/11. That’s just a reality. And she went on to say, “Well that crosses the line.” And I said, “What line is that?”
And she went on to somehow suggest that I had made a bigoted statement. And I said “that’s not a bigoted statement. In fact, in the course of this conversation with O’Reilly, I said that we have as Americans an obligation to protect constitutional rights of everyone in the country and to make sure we don’t have any outbreak of bigotry but that there’s a reality. You cannot ignore what happened on 9/11 and you cannot ignore the connection to Islamic radicalism and you can’t ignore the fact that what has been recently said in court with regard to this is the first drop of blood in a Muslim war on America.
Watch it:
The only way Williams could have been taken out of context would be if he had said his feeling of fear when seeing Muslims on an airplane is wrong. But he did not say that in his original segment with Bill O’Reilly. (ThinkProgress has provided the full transcript here.) And today on Fox, Williams reiterated his claim. Salon’s Glenn Greenwald has also debunked the claim that Williams was taken out of context:
[Many] claim that Think Progress deceitfully edited the video of Williams’ comments here in the same way that Shirley Sherrod’s comments were taken out of context, and that the full context of his remarks makes clear that he said nothing bigoted. Please. [...]
Williams began by telling O’Reilly that he was “right” in his view on Muslims. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with candidly admitting that he gets nervous when he sees Muslims on airplanes — even though those feelings reflect some highly distorted thoughts — as we all have irrational reactions to various situations. But Williams was not condemning his own reaction [emphasis in original]; to the contrary, he went on to justify it by saying that people who wear “Muslim garb” are “identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims,” and that “the war with Muslims” (quoting Faisal Shahzad) is one of those “facts we can’t get away from.”
The Atlantic’s Andrew Sullivan said that Williams’ comments are “the working definition of bigotry,” and asked rhetorically, “What if someone said that they saw a black man walking down the street in classic thug get-up. Would a white person be a bigot of he assumed he was going to mug him?”
Mark Kirk Held ‘Beijing Fundraiser’ One Day Before Voting Against Closing Offshoring Loopholes
Mark Kirk Held ‘Beijing Fundraiser’ One Day Before Voting Against Closing Offshoring Loopholes
Back in May, the House of Representatives passed HR 4213, the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act. The bill, which ran into a Republican-led filibuster that stalled it in the Senate, is intended to close tax loopholes that incentivize the offshoring of American jobs to foreign countries. One congressman who voted against the bill was Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL).
Now, it has come to light that Kirk — who is also the Illinois Republican nominee for U.S. Senate — held a fundraiser with at least a dozen American businessmen doing business in China the day before he went to the floor of the House of Representatives to vote down legislation that would help keep American jobs from moving overseas.
The Capitol Fax Blog has obtained an internal memo detailing the Kirk campaign’s fundraising. Interestingly, at one point the memo sets out a fundraising calendar. On the calendar, it lists the words “Beijing FR” on May 27th, one day before the May 28th vote on the offshoring bill:
As The Capitol Fax Blog notes, “‘FR’ is a standard campaign abbreviation for ‘fundraiser.’” The blog asked the Kirk campaign about the fundraiser, and was told that the campaign held a Skype fundraising call with at least 12 people, all American businessmen operating in China.
Although the campaign did not release the names of the businessmen who were part of the call, perusal of FEC records shows that Kirk did receive donations that day from at least some individuals who have financial interests in China. Geoffery Enck contributed $1,000 that day, and “is the CEO of ITI China Holdings. One of the things the company does is investment banking for Chinese manufacturing plants.” Richard Horowitz donated $1,000 to Kirk the same day, and is President of P & F Industries. P & F Industries in 2009 purchased “approximately 41% of its pneumatic tools from a Far East trading company that owns or represents 21 individual factories in Japan, Taiwan and China and 34% directly from a manufacturer in China.” Mark Silber, an executive at hedge fund Renaissance Technologies, donated $1,000. Renaissance Technologies has received “billions” of dollars from the “China Investment Corp (CIC), the country’s US$200 billion sovereign wealth fund.”
ThinkProgress is not alleging that any of these individuals were necessarily the ones that participated in the “Beijing Fundraiser.” But without Kirk campaign releasing the names of the businesspersons who attended the fundraiser, we cannot know for sure which interests it was that Kirk was responding to when he voted against the offshoring bill the next day.
Buck Embraces Inhofe: ‘Global Warming Is The Greatest Hoax’
Buck Embraces Inhofe: ‘Global Warming Is The Greatest Hoax’
Colorado Republican Senate candidate Ken Buck, like his endorser Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), believes “global warming is the greatest hoax that has been perpetrated.” Buck is part of the Tea Party army storming the U.S. Congress this November that believes the overwhelming scientific consensus about the threat of fossil fuel pollution is a conspiracy. On Wednesday, Buck toured the state with Inhofe, whom he celebrated as “the most conservative senator in the U.S. Senate.” Meeting with supporters, Buck said the “evidence just keeps supporting” Inhofe’s senseless conspiracy theory:
Sen. Inhofe was the first person to stand up and say this global warming is the greatest hoax that has been perpetrated. The evidence just keeps supporting his view, and more and more people’s view, of what’s going on.
In reality, the year 2010 is in the course of becoming the hottest year in recorded history, with Zambia the 18th nation this year to reach an all-time record high.
In their joint appearance in Longmont, CO, Inhofe explained whom he and Buck will be fighting for — corporate lobbyists:
I never dreamed that we would end up with someone in the White House with a huge majority that would attack every institution that made America great. Right before we broke for this recess I had in my office five groups of people. One was a group that was the insurance industry, one was the fiscal industry, one was the military — the defense contractors — one was the energy industry, and of course, the health care industry. Each one of those groups thought they were being targeted.
Watch it:
“I came out here because I’m lonely,” Inhofe said. “Ranked the most conservative senator? That’s right. But we’ve got a lot more coming in, more than any other election in the history of this country.”
Calling For Less ‘Waste,’ Toomey Criticizes Congress For ‘Voting On Systems The Pentagon Doesn’t Even Want’
Calling For Less ‘Waste,’ Toomey Criticizes Congress For ‘Voting On Systems The Pentagon Doesn’t Even Want’
Last night, Pennsylvania Democratic and Republican U.S. Senate candidates Rep. Joe Sestak and Pat Toomey debated a variety of issues before a national television audience.
At one point during the debate, one of the moderators asked the two candidates about their thoughts on “fat” in the Pentagon budget that needs to be cut out. Sestak responded first, boasting that even though “some parts of [the F-22]” — a program the Obama administration’s Pentagon has struggled to end — are built in his district, he supported ending funding for the unnecessary program. Interestingly, Toomey, while reiterating that he wants to give our troops “all the resources they need to get the job done,” insisted that “there is waste pretty much everywhere in the government, and that includes the Pentagon. Part of the problem is voting on systems the Pentagon doesn’t even want”:
TOOMEY: My dad’s a veteran of the Korean War era. My brother in law served 20 years in the Navy. One of the things that’s very, very important to me is to make sure that when we ask me and women to go into harm’s way, they have all the resources they need to get the job done. I have always voted to provide those resources, and I always will. But the fact is, there is waste pretty much everywhere in the government, and that includes the Pentagon. Part of the problem is Congress voting on systems the Pentagon doesn’t even want. Congress has real serious spending problems, and it manifests itself in many ways. Certainly wasteful defense programs are occasionally in that list.
Watch it:
Toomey’s statement makes him at least the fourth Republican running for Senate who has gone on the record as saying that defense cuts are necessary in order to deal with the budget deficit and tackle waste in government. Last week, Illinois candidate Mark Kirk said we need “across the board” reductions in defense spending. Earlier this month, Sen. Johnny Isakson (GA) told a local news station that reducing the deficit “begins with the Department of Defense.” A few days later, Kentucky candidate Rand Paul criticized Republicans for exempting the military from waste-trimming, telling Gwen Ifill that cutting defense spending “has to be on the table.”
If these Republicans are really serious about reining in the defense budget, they can look to The Sustainable Defense Task (SDTF) report released earlier this year. Assembled by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and consisting of the nation’s leading defense and budget experts, the SDTF identified nearly $1 trillion in waste that can be cut from the defense budget over the next ten years simply by eliminating outdated Cold War-era programs. They could also reference a recent report by CAP experts Lawrence Korb and Laura Conley that lays out $108 billion in defense cuts in the current 2015 budget forecast.
Texas University Art Director Forced To Resign After Protesting Rep. Gohmert’s ‘Terror Babies’ Claims
Texas University Art Director Forced To Resign After Protesting Rep. Gohmert’s ‘Terror Babies’ Claims
Christian Cutler
Christian Cutler, who until recently, was the art gallery director at Stephen F. Austin State University (SFA), was also watching Gohmert’s appearances and decided he didn’t want anything to do with the high school art show Gohmert had asked him to judge. According to Cutler, after hearing Gohmert’s statements, he called one of his aides and told her that he had decided against judging the competition, saying “I really don’t want to associate myself with Congressman Gohmert and I felt he was a sensationalist and from recent information via the Web and television I felt like he was a fear monger.”
Ten days later, he received a letter from Gohmert who wrote that he “disagrees” with Cutler’s remarks, “but will defend to the death your right to be misinformed.” Gohmert also revealed that the art show was supposed to be hosted at SFA (a detail Cutler was not previously aware of) and that he was moving it somewhere else. SFA college president Baker Pattillo was copied. Cutler tried to apologize and explain that he wouldn’t have pulled out of the art show had he known it was being held at his school, but to no avail. Shortly thereafter, Cutler was forced to resign from his job.
KTRE9 reports that now, “Cutler frantically searches for a job to support his family.” He claims to have learned his lesson: “Maybe keeping those personal opinions to myself,” he said. Watch KTRE9′s report:
Gohmert maintains that he “did not ask nor desire that the Director of Art Galleries be dismissed and am not aware of all of the reasons for his dismissal,” suggesting that perhaps Cutler’s termination had something to do with his job performance. However, Cutler claims he received “outstanding” performance reviews in the three years he worked for SFA.
(HT: TPM)
Ted Olson: ‘It Would Be Appropriate’ For Administration Not To Appeal DADT Injunction
Ted Olson: ‘It Would Be Appropriate’ For Administration Not To Appeal DADT Injunction
Last night, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily granted the government’s request to stay a federal district court’s injunction of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, potentially allowing the Pentagon to again ban gays and lesbians from serving openly in the armed forces. LGBT advocates and a growing number of Democrats had urged the White House not to appeal the ruling and this morning, Ted Olson — former Solicitor General under President George W. Bush — agreed with this emerging consensus:
“It happens every once in awhile at the federal level when the solicitor general, on behalf of the U.S., will confess error or decline to defend a law,” said former George W. Bush administration solicitor general Ted Olson, who is leading the legal challenge of California’s ban on same-sex marriage. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state attorney general have both declined to defend the law in court.
“I don’t know what is going through the [Obama] administration’s thought process on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’” Olson said. “It would be appropriate for them to say ‘the law has been deemed unconstitutional, we are not going to seek further review of that.’”
But this morning, White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett dismissed this sentiment, suggesting that those who oppose appealing the court’s injunction don’t “actually understand” the process. “You know what, the Justice Department is required to defend the law of the land,” she said. “And I think there are many members of the gay community who actually understand this and who are working with us to try to put pressure on Congress to repeal it.”
NPR Fires Juan Williams After He Admits Getting ‘Nervous’ And ‘Worried’ About Muslims On Airplanes
NPR Fires Juan Williams After He Admits Getting ‘Nervous’ And ‘Worried’ About Muslims On Airplanes
Earlier this week, ThinkProgress reported that NPR’s Juan Williams, appearing on Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor, defended host Bill O’Reilly’s claim that “there’s no question there is a Muslim problem in the world.” O’Reilly was coming to his own defense, referring to comments he had made the previous week on ABC’s The View that “Muslims killed us on 9/11.” “I think you’re right,” Williams said, “political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don’t address reality.” Williams then said that he gets “nervous” and “worried” when he sees people in “Muslim garb” on airplanes.
Williams received considerable criticism after we first drew attention to his remarks. NPR announced last night that it has “terminated” Williams’ contract:
NPR News has terminated the contract of longtime news analyst Juan Williams after remarks he made on the Fox News Channel about Muslims. … Late Wednesday night, NPR issued a statement praising Williams as a valuable contributor but saying it had given him notice that it is severing his contract. “His remarks on The O’Reilly Factor this past Monday were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR,” the statement read.
NPR reported that “Williams’ presence on the largely conservative and often contentious prime-time talk shows of Fox News has long been a sore point with NPR News executives.” Indeed, last year, the organization asked that he no longer be identified as affiliated with NPR when appearing on the O’Reilly Factor.
ThinkProgress never called for Williams’ firing, and we are surprised by NPR’s move. However, NPR has every right to fire an employee whose public statements diminish NPR’s own reputation as a reliable source of news and level-headed analysis. Obviously, a news organization is under no obligation to employ a commentator who airs his own religious bias on national television.
At the same time, NPR’s decision advances the idea that there shouldn’t be a double standard. If media figures such as Rick Sanchez and Helen Thomas are fired for insensitive remarks about non-Muslims, then the standard seems fair to apply when similar comments are said about Muslims. (Also, CNN fired Octavia Nasr for comments about a popular Muslim Lebanese leader which were deemed impolitic.)
“[I]t’s not surprising,” writes Michael Tomasky, “that after all these years of going on [Fox News'] air and drinking their green-room coffee, Williams should choose to ingratiate himself to O’Reilly and his viewers with that Foxy rhetoric. In a sense Williams got what was coming to him. Sleep with dogs, get fleas.” Yet, it appears that other media figures seem to be missing the point. “Watch how many people who cheered when Octavia-Nasr/Helen-Thomas/Rick-Sanchez were fired scream CENSORSHIP!! all day over Juan Williams,” Salon’s Glenn Greenwald tweeted this morning. And as if on queue, the entire Morning Joe crew on MSNBC expressed indignation at Williams’ firing this morning:
JOE SCARBOROUGH: This is disgraceful. NPR needs to hire Juan Williams back.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Something is wrong with what we do if we get fired for having a peaceful voice.
PAT BUCHANAN: That is preposterous! … It is not irrational to be nervous after 9/11 if you see some conspicuous Muslim fellas get in the first class section of a plane as I have!
Watch the segment:
Scarborough defended Williams, saying “he was setting it up to say, ‘Listen I understand people get nervous, sometimes I get nervous, but we’ve got to move past that. We can’t paint an entire faith with this.’” The full transcript of Williams’ exchange with O’Reilly is provided below. More »
ThinkFast: October 21, 2010
ThinkFast: October 21, 2010
“Skepticism and outright denial of global warming are among the articles of faith of the Tea Party movement,” the New York Times notes today, surveying the movement. Nearly all tea party-backed candidates are global warming deniers, while a Times poll found “only 14 percent of Tea Party supporters said that global warming is an environmental problem that is having an effect now.”
Bill Gates has donated $700,000 to the campaign against California’s Proposition 23, which would effectively kill the state’s landmark climate law. Google co-founder Sergei Brin and the Intel Corp. co-founder Gordon Moore have both also contributed, but large polluters have spent at least $8 million to get Prop. 23 passed.
Republican plans for Social Security will dramatically reduce future benefits for people now entering the work force, according to a study from the Social Security Administration’s chief actuary. The GOP proposals would result in benefit cuts from 10 percent to as high as 50 percent.
A former African-American technician who worked at Fox News has filed a discrimination lawsuit, alleging that he faced “daily abuse, fear and humiliation” from other employees because of his race. When the technician complained to Fox management, they reportedly fired him.
On Good Morning America today, Senate candidate Chris Coons (D-DE) switched his position on the Bush tax cuts extension, saying, “I’d be willing to extend them for several years for all Americans, of whatever income.” His statement contradicts President Obama’s position and his own campaign website, which reads “High-Income Bush Tax Cuts Should Expire on Schedule.”
Reuters warns that Republican gains in Congress would “further stymie President Barack Obama’s efforts to try terrorism suspects in criminal courts.” “I personally think they’re going to lose the House and once they do that, I think that’s the end of their hopes of criminal trials rather than the military courts,” said UVA politics professor Larry Sabato.
During a visit to Damascus earlier this week, former President Jimmy Carter called for a full lifting of Israel’s blockade on Gaza. “The blockade is one of the most serious human rights violations on Earth and it must be lifted fully,” said Carter. The group of peace mediators Carter was traveling with, known as The Elders, noted that Israeli-Palestinian peace talks that exclude Hamas are unlikely to succeed.
Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a one-page order that reinstating the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law. The decision will be in effect while the appeals court considers whether to issue a stay until February, when the Ninth Circuit will hear the full appeal.
And finally: Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell regrets airing her “I’m not a witch” campaign ad. Appearing on Good Morning America today, O’Donnell said, “our intention was to kill” talk of her witchcraft dabbling, “and that’s not what happened.” O’Donnell added that for Halloween, “I certainly am not going to be a witch,” though she said she may dress up as Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz, who kills a witch.
ThinkProgress is hiring! Details here.
Kasich Shows He Has Hannity In His Back Pocket: Goes On Show To Pitch His Website, Raise Money For Campaign
Kasich Shows He Has Hannity In His Back Pocket: Goes On Show To Pitch His Website, Raise Money For Campaign
More than lavish dinners, snazzy mailers, and email blasts, GOP candidates are flocking to the best fundraising tool this election season: Fox News. As Senate candidate Sharron Angle (R-NV) so aptly pointed out, just one mention of a campaign website on a “friendly press outlet” like Fox News host Sean Hannity’s show can translate into millions of campaign cash. Delaware’s colorful senate candidate Christine O’Donnell (R) even flaunted Hannity’s support before a meeting of GOP strategists, saying “Sean Hannity’s in my back pocket, and I can go on his show and raise money by attacking you guys.”
Indeed, Hannity’s TV and radio spots are proving to be more GOP fundraiser than anything else. And no other Republican candidate has benefited more than former Fox News host and Ohio gubernatorial candidate John Kasich (R). Hannity has hosted Kasich at least ten times since he’s declared his candidacy. After Kasich promoted his campaign website in his ninth visit to Hannity’s TV show last week, Hannity responded “I want to put this — put some emphasis on this because this is really important. Explain to people why — we cannot afford to lose that race?” But it was in their tenth exchange on Hannity’s radio show yesterday that Hannity and Kasich clearly spelled out this fundraising relationship:
HANNITY: John Kasich, we’re watching Ohio really really closely. We appreciate you being with us and thanks for taking time out of your busy day and we wish you the best. This is a very important election, I think, for the country. And we’ll be watching in the next 14 days, and on election night, we’ll be watching very closely.
KASICH: And Kasich for Ohio.com. K-A-S-I-C-H. We need your help all over the country.
HANNITY: By the way, there are some in the liberal media think that I really meant to support Barney Frank over you and the fact that I, as a conservative commentator, support you shock some people. But you know what I stand proudly in Kasich’s corner with an endorsement as long as it doesn’t hurt you.
KASICH: We need all the help you can give us, Sean. They love you out here.
HANNITY: Alright, John Kasich. This is an important race, really important race.
Listen to it:
If Angle’s $40,000 intake is any indication, there is no way that Hannity’s endorsement could hurt. As Baltimore Sun TV critic David Zurawik noted, the only thing Hannity’s actions hurt is the credibility of Fox as a news organization. “What Hannity allowed Kasich to do [on last week's show],” Zurawik states, “crosses the line as to what’s acceptable for any news organization, and we all know it isn’t the first Hannity time has done this. If Fox News management wants mainstream critics to defend the organization’s right to be treated like a news organization, it needs to behave like one — all the time. Hannity’s bosses need to publicly put an end to such partisan on-air fund raising now — not sometime in November after the election.”
But Kasich’s distinguished “friendship” with Hannity’s boss Rupert Murdoch, the CEO of Fox News’ parent company News Corporation, led to repeated donations directly to the Republican Governors Association rather than any kind of reprimand. And with almost every major contender for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination on the Fox News payroll and all but one speaking exclusively on Fox, GOP candidates can count on a long, fruitful relationship with the network that, contrary to Hannity’s belief, will shock absolutely no one.
For more on how Fox News factors into the GOP, check out today’s Progress report here.
O’Donnell Can’t Name A Single Democratic Senator
O’Donnell Can’t Name A Single Democratic Senator
In a debate today hosted by local television station WHYY, Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell seemed unable to name a single sitting Democratic senator. Asked which Democrats she would be willing to work with were she elected, O’Donnell paused for a long moment, before saying Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. O’Donnell acknowledged that Clinton is no longer a senator, but said she hopes to be on the Foreign Relations Committee and would be able to work with her in that capacity. When her opponent, Democrat Chris Coons, suggested O’Donnell couldn’t name any Democratic senators, she responded by shouting out the name of Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman:
MODERATOR: Give me a name, Christine, of someone in the U.S. Senate, across the aisle that you’re comfortable working with.
O’DONNELL: [Pause] Well, she’s not a senator any more, but I would definitely have to say Hillary Clinton. [...]
COONS: One of the real risks as we go forward, is that if we elect someone who literally cannot name a single currently serving senator in my party with whom she would work –
O’DONNELL: Senator Lieberman!
COONS: Someone who has no experience crossing the biparistan divide.
Watch it:
Of course, this isn’t the first time O’Donnell has been stumped by a simple question. In a different debate on Monday, O’Donnell seemed confused about the text of the First Amendment, despite the fact that she has touted herself as a Constitutional scholar in the past.
For more on O’Donnell’s record, check out our ThinkProgress report: The Old Adventures of New Christine.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll