BP CEO Tony Hayward: ‘I’d Like My Life Back’
BP CEO Tony Hayward: ‘I’d Like My Life Back’
The millionaire CEO of foreign oil giant BP, Tony Hayward, is upset at the inconvenience caused to him by his company’s devastation of the Gulf of Mexico. BP’s offshore drilling explosion claimed 11 lives on April 20, and has since spewed 20 to 100 million gallons of oil into the Gulf. At least 491 birds, 227 turtles and 27 mammals, including dolphins, have been found dead. On Sunday, immediately after apologizing, Hayward then complained about the effect of the Deepwater Horizon disaster on his personal life, saying “I would like my life back“:
We’re sorry for the massive disruption it’s caused their lives. There’s no one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back.
Watch it:
Hayward, who pulled in $4.5 million last year, has a record of insensitive comments about the greatest environmental disaster in the United States:
“What the hell did we do to deserve this?” [New York Times, 4/30/10]
“The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” [Guardian, 5/14/10]
“I think the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest.” [Sky News, 5/18/10]
There are no indications that the Obama administration intends to remove Hayward or his company from running the cleanup effort, however. “I trust Tony Hayward,” Admiral Thad Allen, the top federal official overseeing the Gulf disaster, told CNN last week.
Hard as it may be for Hayward to believe, the residents of the Louisiana coast may want their nightmare to end even more than BP. “I was just sitting here thinking our way of life is over. It’s the end, the apocalypse,” fisherman Tom Young of Plaquemines Parish told reporters today. (HT Eschaton)
I think he has been a superb chief executive by common consent, in terms of internal and external perception. That doesn't change because of this accident.
Bob Dudley, BP Managing Director:
I think he's done a great job of leading a company to stand up and do the right thing. . . . I think Tony's doing a fantastic job.
- Comments
- View Comments
Paranoid ‘Hatriot’ Group Attempting Takeover of Local Sheriffs’ Offices
Paranoid ‘Hatriot’ Group Attempting Takeover of Local Sheriffs’ Offices
Today, a rather credulous Associated Press article reports on a movement to replace local sheriffs with proponents of a particularly virulent form of “tentherism“:
The retired police officer and investment adviser intends to make that a reality, joining at least a dozen candidates in other states running for office on an intepretation [sic] of the Constitution they say means the sheriff is the highest law enforcer in the land, even above federal agents.
“Frankly if he wants to, the sheriff can probably do more for the Constitution and protecting the people than anyone else,” Nichols said.
The candidates are part of a loosely organized nationwide movement called the Oath Keepers, which is enlisting law enforcement and military personnel to vow to refuse 10 orders they say are unconstitutional, from confiscating guns to warrantless searches.
Inexplicably, the AP article focuses almost exclusively on three aspects of the Oath Keepers’ philosophy: their opposition to gun control, their constitutionally appropriate opposition to warrantless searches, and their opposition to unconstitutional detention policies.
Absent from the article, however, is a discussion of the Oath Keepers’ overactive fantasy life. The Oath Keepers’ website is riddled with paranoid rhetoric about government officials “disarm[ing] the American people,” “confiscat[ing] the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies,” and “blockad[ing] American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.” In early 2008, the Oath Keepers’ founder warned that a “dominatrix-in-chief” named “Hitlery Clinton” would impose a police state on America and shoot all resisters. After primary voters chose a different candidate, the Oath Keepers simply rewrote their paranoid fantasy to include a taller, African-American lead.
At a Center for American Progress Action Fund event remembering the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing, former President Clinton described the Oath Keepers as a “hatriot” group that embraces the same violent rhetoric that fueled Timothy McVeigh. If they get their way, this delusional group will soon be given a badge and a gun.
Israeli Commandos Raid Gaza Aid Flotilla, Netanyahu Cancels Meeting With Obama
Israeli Commandos Raid Gaza Aid Flotilla, Netanyahu Cancels Meeting With Obama
The Associated Press reports that “Israeli naval commandos stormed a flotilla of ships carrying aid and hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists to the blockaded Gaza Strip on Monday, killing at least 10 passengers in a predawn raid that set off worldwide condemnation and a diplomatic crisis”:
Israel said the forces encountered unexpected resistance as they boarded the vessels. Dozens of passengers and at least five Israeli soldiers were wounded in the confrontation in international waters.
The Israeli military said in a statement: “Navy fighters took control of six ships that tried to violate the naval blockade (of the Gaza Strip) … During the takeover, the soldiers encountered serious physical violence by the protesters, who attacked them with live fire.”
The Israeli raid has “triggered widespread condemnation across Europe; many of the passengers were from European countries. The raid also strained already tense relations with Israel’s longtime Muslim ally Turkey, the unofficial sponsor of the mission, and drew more attention to the plight of Gaza’s 1.5 million people.”
Greater international attention and sympathy to the plight of Palestinians suffering under the Israeli-Egyptian- (and U.S.) enforced siege of Hamas-ruled Gaza is precisely what Israeli authorities were hoping to avoid. In the days and weeks leading up to the launch of the flotilla, the Israeli government and its American mouthpieces were hard at work both to downplay the extent of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and to present the flotilla’s sponsors as supporters of terrorism. (The evidence for the latter claim seems to amount to the usual game of “Six Degrees of Osama bin Laden,” wherein everyone who has ever contributed money to a Palestinian cause is linked to global jihadism.)
Responding to claims that the aid flotilla itself represented a “provocation,” Hussein Ibish of the American Task Force on Palestine writes, well, yeah: “The whole point of the ‘Gaza flotilla’ was to get a reaction out of Israel and call international attention to the problem of the blockade of Gaza…like all other acts of civil disobedience it was designed to provoke a response.”
Writing that the attack “is likely to create sustained international attention to the way Israel has treated the Gaza Strip in a way that nothing else has since the Gaza war and possibly since the beginning of the blockade,” Ibish suggests we compare the flotilla “to the ‘Mississippi Freedom Summer’ in which young white Americans from around the country went to the bastion of Jim Crow in order to organize local African-Americans, register them to vote, educate them and confront segregation”:
They knew it was a dangerous situation, and they were shocked but not surprised when James Chaney, Michael Schwerner, and Andrew Goodman were abducted and killed by the KKK as the project just got going. There were many other acts of quasi-official violence meted out to the volunteers, and while the organizers obviously would have preferred to have avoided all of that, they expected it and it was part of their strategy. The largely but not entirely unstated reasoning was that the country would continue to ignore massive violence directed towards the African-American community in Mississippi, but could and would not remain oblivious to similar violence directed towards young, white, middle-class college students from New York City and other metropolitan centers. This, indeed, proved the case. The violence directed at the Mississippi Freedom Summer shocked the conscience of the country and was among the numerous decisive moments in the civil rights movement that ultimately succeeded in dismantling the apparatus of formalized racism in the United States.
Like segregation in the American South, the siege of Gaza (and the entire Israeli occupation, for that matter) is a moral abomination that should be intolerable to anyone claiming progressive values. It’s sad that it should require the deaths of non-Palestinians to finally shake the international community from apathy and inaction, but, as with the tragic murders of Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner, if it contributes to ending the situation then that’s a positive outcome.
Unfortunately, the killings will also likely result in the strengthening of support for Hamas vis a vis more moderate Palestinian leaders, causing greater unrest, and stirring more violence.
White House spokesman Bill Burton said in a written statement that “the United States deeply regrets the loss of life and injuries sustained, and is currently working to understand the circumstances surrounding this tragedy.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has expressed his “full backing” for the raid, has canceled his scheduled meeting tomorrow with President Obama.
After Criticizing McCain For Changing Positions, J.D. Hayworth Is Called Out On His Own Immigration Flip-Flop
After Criticizing McCain For Changing Positions, J.D. Hayworth Is Called Out On His Own Immigration Flip-Flop
This morning, Meet the Press host David Gregory noted that guest and Arizona senatorial candidate J.D. Hayworth was once a supporter of a path to citizenship and guest worker program. Given that Hayworth has framed his campaign around attacking opponent Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for flip-flopping from a pro-immigration reform stance to a restrictionist border hawk, Gregory asked Hayworth to define what really makes him any different. Hayworth attributed his change of heart to 9/11:
GREGORY: Going back to 2001, you actually believed in a guest worker program. You believed in a path towards citizenship which you now call amnesty. Sen. McCain was a champion of comprehensive reform with Sen. Kennedy. Back during the Bush administration. [...] How does your position really differ from him?
HAYWORTH: Well it differs profoundly because what happened on 9/11 helped the scales fall from my eyes. I understand that national security is border security. And I understand that we must enforce the laws.
Watch it:
However, the anti-immigrant group, NumbersUSA tracks Hayworth’s pro-immigration votes during his term in the House of Representatives as going back to as late as 2005, when he voted against H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act — which ultimately passed. In fact, many of Hayworth’s efforts and ire have focused more on immigration from Latin American countries than in stopping terrorists from entering the country. In 2006, Hayworth proposed a three-year ban on legal immigration from Mexico. In an op-ed published the same year, Hayworth conflated the two, stating, “How different are these radical Islamists from the Mexican politicians who push for a Mexico without borders and undermine our efforts at assimilation?”
Hayworth claims 9/11 was an eye-opener for him on immigration, but conservative guru Linda Chavez has a different take. “Hayworth, a six-term congressman, once favored a guest worker program but flip-flopped when he sensed bashing immigrants was a surer ticket to re-election,” wrote Chavez. According to Chavez, the strategy failed miserably for Hayworth, who “lost handily” to a more moderate candidate in 2006.
Former Bush Adviser: ‘Republicans Are So Far Out Of Step’ On ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Former Bush Adviser: ‘Republicans Are So Far Out Of Step’ On ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Last week before the House passed an amendment to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT), the policy that bars gays and lesbians from serving in the military openly, Republicans took to the floor to rail against repeal, calling it a “social experiment,” un-patriotic and an “insult” to the military. Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) claimed that “the American people don’t want the American military to be used to advance a liberal political agenda.”
Today, on ABC’s This Week, former Bush adviser Matthew Dowd asked rhetorically, “They socialize with kids that are openly gay and all of the sudden they go in the armed services, somebody gives them a rifle and they’re not supposed to be around gay people anymore?” Then he took a shot at the GOP intransigence:
DOWD: It doesn’t make any sense. It’s long been decided in the public’s mind. I think the Republicans are so far out of step about this, where the country is…Republican office holders are so far out of step with this.
Conservative columnist George Will later said “the case is over” on DADT. Noting overwhelming public support for DADT repeal from both progressives and conservatives in America, host Jake Tapper then asked, “What’s going on with the Republicans in Congress?” Will replied, “They’re not being very intelligent.” Watch it:
Dowd and Will are right — the GOP is way out of step with Americans on DADT. A recent CNN poll found that 80 percent support allowing gays to serve openly in the military. “Support is widespread, even among Republicans. Nearly six in ten Republicans favor allowing openly gay individuals to serve in the military,” said CNN polling director Keating Holland.
Yes, We Can Push Out BP
Yes, We Can Push Out BP
The latest attempt by BP to shut down its apocalyptic oil gusher — the “top kill” maneuver — has failed, despite BP CEO Tony Hayward’s assurance yesterday that it had a 70 percent chance of success. There’s no question that the federal government, if the president so decides, can take over the challenge of mitigating the damage of BP’s oil to the shores and waters of the Gulf of Mexico. But can President Obama take charge of stopping the wellhead gusher from the foreign oil giant? The administration argues it’s keeping BP in charge of the attempts to shut down the blown out well because government doesn’t have the equipment or expertise to solve this engineering problem without BP:
Adm. Thad Allen, Incident Commander: “To push BP out of the way, it would raise the question, to replace them with what?” [White House briefing, 5/24/10]
David Axelrod, White House adviser: “They’ve got equipment that our government doesn’t have.” [Fox News, 5/24/10]
Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior: “This administration has done everything we can possibly do to make sure that we push BP to stop the spill and to contain the impact. We have also been very clear that there are areas where BP and the private sector are the ones who must continue to lead the efforts with government oversight, such as the deployment of private sector technology 5,000 feet below the ocean’s surface to kill the well.” [White House briefing, 5/24/10]
The administration has been keeping an ecological criminal in charge of the crime scene during a national crisis. Seventeen nations have offered assistance — but “the final decision is up to BP” to accept it, according to the State Department — and only Canada, Mexico and Norway have been allowed to help so far. The law — Title 33, Section 1321 — mandates that President Obama “shall direct all Federal, State, and private actions to remove the discharge,” using any means necessary. There are not any resources — people or equipment — that Obama doesn’t have the authority to seize and put into service.
It’s certainly fair to expect that private sector resources may be needed for this disaster, but BP’s only unique qualification for the disaster response is that it is the perpetrator. Although BP is by default a party responsible for implementing the cleanup plan, it is by no means the only possibility. The rig was operated by Transocean; the cementing done by Halliburton; the blowout preventer built by Cameron. Other companies involved in ultra-deepwater drilling include engineering giant Schlumberger, Norway’s nationalized oil company Statoil, Shell, and Chevron.
If the Navy can’t direct the undersea mission after it’s given authority over any needed private resources, it calls into question why we entrust it to operate aircraft carriers and nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered submarines.
Obama does not need to keep working with BP management — like CEO Tony “Very Very Modest” Hayward, BP America president Lamar “No Certainty” McKay, BP Chairman Carl-Henric “Big And Important” Svanberg, or COO Doug “Very Optimistic” Suttles — who have repeatedly laughed off the scale of this catastrophe. If federal officials believe that BP engineers should continue to work on the problem, the President has the authority to have those people working directly for the federal government.
In fact, the president has the authority to nationalize BP America and seize all of its assets, rendering the question of reliance on BP moot. If Obama does not believe that the Clean Water Act’s “spill of national significance” provisions give him sufficient authority, he can rightly declare a national emergency, or demand that Congress deliver him necessary legislation. Or there’s an easier option: BP is on the hook for all costs of this apocalyptic disaster. Obama can simply buy BP America and send the bill to its foreign parent company.
Cross-posted on the Wonk Room.
Louisiana official: BP bused in 400 temporary workers for Obama’s Gulf Coast visit.
Louisiana official: BP bused in 400 temporary workers for Obama’s Gulf Coast visit.
Increased national attention was on the Gulf Coast yesterday when President Obama made a visit to assess the oil spill response effort. An official in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, is reporting that BP “bused 400 cleanup workers into Grand Isle” — at a rate of $12 an hour — to be there when Obama arrived. From New Orleans NBC affiliate WDSU:
Jefferson Parish Councilman Chris Roberts didn’t buy into the cleanup effort.
“They must think we’re all fools,” he said.
Roberts called BP’s efforts “shameful.” [...]
Roberts said that since oil started coming ashore in Grand Isle last week, no more than a dozen workers hired by BP have been seen on the beaches in the area, until Friday when the president arrived.
Yahoo News adds that Roberts said the “overnight contingent of workers was there mainly to furnish a Potemkin-style backdrop for the event — while also making it appear that BP was firmly in command of spill cleanup efforts.” A BP contractor, however, insisted to WDSU that it wasn’t a dog and pony show, but rather just a “sheer coincidence” that all the workers arrived on the day the President came to inspect the company’s work.
Gingrich Plays Defense On His Nazi Comparison: ‘I’m Not Saying Obama Is The Bad Guy’
Gingrich Plays Defense On His Nazi Comparison: ‘I’m Not Saying Obama Is The Bad Guy’
Newt Gingrich sat down with the Des Moines Register editorial board this week to discuss his new book To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular Socialist Machine. Right at the start of the interview, a Register editor asked if Gingrich thinks “voters are stupid since they elected President Obama in 2008.” The former Speaker walked back the entire premise of his book. “The whole question of the scale of change has nothing to do with Obama,” he said.
Later in the hour-long interview, Gingrich backtracked even further. “I’m not here saying Obama is the bad guy and if he wasn’t there things would be good.” Soon after, the Register editor called Gingrich out:
DMR EDITOR: I was really taken aback by something you just said, in that “I”m not here saying Obama is the bad guy.” In your book you say, “The President’s secular socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.” That sure sounds like you think he’s a bad guy with bad ideas.
Gingrich again tried to distance himself from the fiery rhetoric in his book, simply saying that the “secular socialist machine” is taking over “traditional America” without linking Obama to it.
At the end of the interview, the Register editor told Gingrich that the conversation with him had been quite reasonable, which she noted didn’t seem to square with the rhetoric in his book, calling it, in parts, “offensive” and “really over the top”:
DMR EDITOR: Do you see part of your role in writing this book and touring the country and speaking is helping Americans find a consensus on some of these crucial issues we have to address…or do you see it as to rabble-rouse because this conversation has been very reasonable and interesting, [but] this book is really over the top in places. …Some of the rhetoric is really offensive and it’s just it doesn’t quite fit with the conversation in this room so what is your role?
Again, Gingrich dodged the question. “I’m trying to say is that we’re at a genuine crossroads and it involves choices,” he said, later adding, “My real job is not to figure out how to find a common ground with the left.” Watch it:
Aside from the title of his book and the contents within, less than two weeks ago, Gingrich was indeed saying Obama is the bad guy. “’The secular socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.’ Mr. Speaker, respectfully, isn’t that wildly over the top?” Fox host Chris Wallace asked. Gingrich replied, “No. … Just listen to President Obama’s language. He gets to decide who earns how much. He gets to decide when it’s too much.”
Beck Accuses Jewish Social Justice Worker Of Advocating A New Holocaust
Beck Accuses Jewish Social Justice Worker Of Advocating A New Holocaust
In a Washington Post op-ed last month, Simon Greer — the president and CEO of Jewish Funds for Justice, an organization that helps people achieve social and economic security by investing in healthy neighborhoods — bluntly rebuked Glenn Beck for his war against social justice.
“Mr. Beck, you are a con man and America is not buying it,” Greer wrote. “When churches, synagogues, mosques, and other houses of worship across this country advocate for social justice, advocate for the common good, advocate for America, they, and we, walk in God’s path.”
Yesterday on his radio station, Beck responded the only way he knows how — with hyperbolic, extreme rhetoric referencing Nazi imagery. Beck said that Greer’s advocacy for the common good and social justice “leads to death camps.” “A Jew, of all people, should know that,” Beck added. “This is exactly the kind of talk that led to the death camps in Germany.” (Media Matters has the audio.)
After hearing Beck’s radical rant, Greer responded with this statement yesterday afternoon:
Glenn Beck has a history of recklessly invoking Nazi Germany and the Holocaust in order to advance his political agenda. But never before has Beck accused Jews – including survivors of the Holocaust and their children and grandchildren – of paving the way for fascism. Through his comments, Beck has demonstrated that he has no idea what leads to fascism. Jews and others, who were victims of the Holocaust, do not have the luxury of his ignorance.
Beck’s reflexive hatred for government is rejected by Americans of all backgrounds, who have seen the powerful role government can play in providing us with greater freedom, security, and opportunity. I am proud of the work we do at Jewish Funds for Justice, where our belief that we are all made in the image of the divine compels us to petition private enterprise, charities, and yes, the government, to do their part to ensure our shared divinity.
Just last month, Beck was deploring the use of Nazi comparisons when invoked to describe the anti-immigrant Arizona law. “You’re out of your mind!” Beck said of those drawing such parallels. But as many have noted, throwing out Nazi comparisons is specialty of Beck’s. Mocking Beck’s Nazi obsession, Comedy Central’s Lewis Black commented, “Glenn Beck has Nazi Tourette’s.”
Is BP Oil Catastrophe ‘Unprecedented’? Hardly
Is BP Oil Catastrophe ‘Unprecedented’? Hardly
Numerous politicians and oil industry officials have claimed the BP oil catastrophe growing in the Gulf of Mexico is “unprecedented.” From BP CEO Tony Hayward, who called his company’s environmental crime an “unprecedented accident,” to Admiral Thad Allen, U.S. Coast Guard, who called it an “unprecedented anomalous event,” officials and pundits have given the impression that the consequences of this catastrophe could not have been predicted. In a Congressional oversight hearing on the apocalyptic disaster on Thursday, Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA) even argued the country should respond to this “unprecedented” event by making sure “that we continue to produce oil here in the states.”
Watch a compilation prepared by ThinkProgress:
On Thursday, May 27, Rep. George Miller (D-CA) responded to the myth that this catastrophe was unprecedented and thus unforeseeable:
Every time we have a catastrophic event like this involving British Petroleum or other parts of the oil and gas industry, we’re told that this is an unpredictable cascade of unforeseeable errors, that this is unprecedented, that nobody could have foreseen this. This is sort of like the bankers on Wall Street. Nobody could have foreseen the risks that they engineered themselves, so nobody’s responsible. I don’t believe this was some “black swan” or “perfect storm” event. There wasn’t something that could not have been foreseen. And I don’t think this is something you can promise will never happen again.
Like the rest of the oil industry, BP has a long record of tragic, extraordinary environmental disasters, stretching from Alaska to Nigeria. And this particular disaster is not unprecedented in size, in the kind of accident, nor in the methods used to respond. There have been dozens of oil well blowouts in the Gulf of Mexico, including 39 since 2007, and the worst oil blowout in history in 1979. What makes this catastrophe new is its location in the fertile and fragile ecosystem of the northern Gulf, and the depth at which the well was drilled, increasing the dangers. But this event is yet another tragic reminder of the truth of George Santayana’s dire maxim: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Cross-posted on the Wonk Room.
Bachmann Endorses Repealing No Child Left Behind, Parts Of Medicare, And All Foreign Aid
Bachmann Endorses Repealing No Child Left Behind, Parts Of Medicare, And All Foreign Aid
On the day after health care reform passed the House last March, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) introduced legislation to repeal it. But Bachmann’s regressive agenda goes beyond just repealing health care reform. In an October 2009 discussion at the Heritage Foundation, Bachmann laid out her strategy for a conservative future, saying that “after we defund the left, we pass repealer bill after repealer bill after repealler bill.”
When a man named Doug called into Scott Hennen’s radio show yesterday, Bachmann gave an indication of just what she would like to repeal. Doug said that he “very rarely” hears “anybody speaking about repealing all the government programs that have no constitutional warrant” such as No Child Left Behind “and all the money that goes to foreign aid for countries like Haiti.” When he asked Bachmann if she was committed to cutting such programs, she said that she agreed with everything he said:
DOUG: My question to you though, is, has to do with the Constitution and all that I’m hearing people say from the Republican and more conservative sides, very rarely do I hear anybody speaking about repealing all the government programs that have no constitutional warrant. And, as you know better than must of us, that even under the Republicans in the last administration and beyond when we had control of both the House and the Senate there was a lot of things like Medicare B and the farm bill expansion and No Child Left Behind that there’s really no constitutional basis for and all the money that goes to foreign aid for countries like Haiti that we really don’t get any real return on.
My question to you, to hear how you would address it, is your commitment to taking Washington, what is your commitment to cutting programs in an appropriate time frame, but cutting of programs and institutions, and institutionalizing a commitment to say no new programs that the Constitution does not warrant that program. Live by the Constitution as the basis for cutting the budget.
BACHMANN: Doug, I’m in agreement with everything that you said. We wouldn’t be in the problem that we’re in today if the federal government would have followed the constrictions of the Constitution in the first place. … So yes, I am committed to getting our nation back to a constitutional form of government and doing the cutting that will be required, number one, because of the Constitution, number two, because we are looking at certain economic collapse if we fail to do that.
Listen here:
Bachmann has previously endorsed ending such long-standing programs. In February, she called for a “reorganization” of entitlements like “Social Security and Medicare and all the rest” where people “already in the system” would continue to receive benefits, but “everybody else” would be weaned off.
Transcript: More »
Former Argentine president says Bush told him ‘the best way to revitalize the economy is war.’
Former Argentine president says Bush told him ‘the best way to revitalize the economy is war.’
Oliver Stone’s new documentary South of the Border, which interviews several left-wing leaders of Latin American countries, has unearthed a startling new allegation from Argentina’s former president Néstor Kirchner. During his interview with Stone, Kirchner said he once discussed global economic problems with former President George W. Bush. The former Argentine president says that when he suggested a new Marshall Plan, referring to the WW II-era European reconstruction plan, Bush “got angry” and suggested that “the Marshall Plan is a crazy idea of the Democrats.” Instead, Kirchner says, Bush suggested that “the best way to revitalize the economy is war”:
KIRCHNER: I said that a solution for the problems right now, I told Bush, is a Marshall Plan. And he got angry. He said the Marshall Plan is a crazy idea of the Democrats. He said the best way to revitalize the economy is war. And that the United States has grown stronger with war.
STONE: War, he said that?
KIRCHNER: He said that. Those were his exact words.
STONE: Is he suggesting that South America go to war?
KIRCHNER: Well, he was talking about the United States: ‘The Democrats had been wrong. All of the economic growth of the United States has been encouraged by wars.’ He said it very clearly.
Watch it:
It is worth noting that despite the prosecution of two major wars, there was very minimal net job growth during Bush’s tenure as president. And of course, he bequeathed an economy that suffered massive job losses in his wake.
Days after saying ‘leave peoples’ families alone,’ Beck attacks Malia Obama’s intelligence. (Updated)
Days after saying ‘leave peoples’ families alone,’ Beck attacks Malia Obama’s intelligence. (Updated)
Earlier this week, rodeo clown Glenn Beck became incensed when he learned that journalist Joe McGuinniss has moved next door to Sarah Palin in Alaska, calling it “harassment.” “Leave peoples’ families alone!” Beck exclaimed, arguing that he said the same thing during the Clinton and Bush administrations. “You don’t go after Chelsea Clinton! You don’t talk about the Bush kids!” he said. Yesterday during his press conference on the Gulf oil spill, President Obama said that his daughter Malia had asked him, “Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?” So today, Beck dropped his rule of leaving the families alone and took a shot at 11 year-old Malia. Mockingly replaying the conversation between the President and his daughter, Beck attacked Malia’s intelligence:
BECK: This is such a ridiculous — this is such a ridiculous thing that his daughter– (imitating Malia) Daddy?
GRAY: It’s so stupid.
BECK: How old is his daughter? Like, thirteen?
GRAY: Well, one of thems, I think, thirteen, one’s eleven, or something.
BECK: “Did you plug the hole yet, daddy?” Is that’s their — that’s the level of their education, that they’re coming to — they’re coming to daddy and saying ‘Daddy, did you plug the hole yet?’ ” Plug the hole!
Listen here:
In discussing how President Obama uses children to shield himself from criticism, I broke my own rule about leaving kids out of political debates. The children of public figures should be left on the sidelines. It was a stupid mistake and I apologize--and as a dad I should have known better.
Right-Wing Radio Host On NY Mosque: ‘I Hope Somebody Blows It Up’
Right-Wing Radio Host On NY Mosque: ‘I Hope Somebody Blows It Up’
The American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative recently presented plans to build a community center two blocks away from Ground Zero in New York City that would include “a mosque, performance art center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces.” Even though a community advisory board voted in favor of the proposal, conservatives have continued to attack the plan, with Rep. Peter King (R-NY) calling it “offensive.”
On Wednesday, a man named “Tony” called into the KTRH-AM (Houston, TX) radio show of right-wing radio host Michael Berry in support of the Muslim center. First, Berry asked the caller whether “Tony” was his real name, because with his accent, he didn’t “sound like a ‘Tony.’” He repeatedly tried to link to the mosque to terrorists, eventually saying that if the mosque is built, he hopes someone blows it up:
BERRY: No, Tony, you can’t build a mosque at the site of 9/11.
TONY: Why not? Why not?
BERRY: No, you can’t. And I’ll tell you this: If you do build a mosque, I hope somebody blows it up. … I hope the mosque isn’t built, and if it is, I hope it’s blown up. And I mean that. … It’s right-wing radicals like me that are going to keep this country safe for you and everyone else from the people who are flying the planes from the country you fled from. If you want to identify with those people, go live with them.
Listen here:
Yesterday, the Muslim civil rights organization CAIR filed a complaint against Berry with the FCC. “Calls for acts of violence against houses of worship must never be tolerated or excused,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. “We ask the FCC to demonstrate that incitement to violence is never acceptable on our nation’s airwaves.”
On his website, Berry has responded to CAIR’s charge by saying, “I did NOT advocate bombing any mosque” because “the supposed mosque does not exist.” He then accused CAIR of trying to “scare people into believing that having differing opinions will cost you your job.” However, right after all of these accusations — in a markedly different tone (and, interestingly, a different font) — Berry apologizes for his remarks:
While I stand by my disagreement of the building of the mosque on the site, I SHOULD NOT have said “I hope someone blows it up.” That was dumb, and beneath me. I was trying to show “Tony” how much I opposed his opinion, but I went too far. For that, I apologize to my listeners.
Berry’s comments are especially disturbing in light of a recent terrorist incident directed at an Islamic Center in Jacksonville, FL. A man firebombed the mosque when there were about 60 people inside, although no one was injured.
Berry has been a substitute host for Mark Levin and a guest on the shows of Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity. On March 20, he wrote on his Twitter page, “NYC at talk radio convention. Sean Hannity very supportive of my career, offering to help. Said he listens when I sub for Mark Levin.”
Defying Pence, five Republicans join majority to vote for repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’
Defying Pence, five Republicans join majority to vote for repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’
In a historic vote last night, the House passed an amendment to repeal the military’s discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Earlier this week, Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), the House’s third-ranking Republican, had “promised unified GOP opposition to lifting the ban” on gays serving openly in the military. “The American people don’t want the American military to be used to advance a liberal political agenda. And House Republicans will stand on that principle,” Pence said. But dismissing Pence’s leadership, five Republicans joined 229 Democrats to vote for the repeal:
The vote was 234 to 194.
Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Ron Paul (R-TX), Joseph Cao (R-LA), Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), and Charles Djou (R-HI) were the only Republicans to vote in favor of scrapping the law.
Not surprisingly, the right-wing has already begun attacking this group of five congressmen for voting their conscious and breaking party lines. “Five Republicans voted to join the radical gay lobby in pushing passage of Nancy Pelosi’s remaining priority item before the elections,” Human Events’ Connie Hair wrote this morning. Without directly naming the Republicans, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) said voting for the bill showed “disrespect for military personnel by attempting to force through repeal.”
DeMint: We Should Treat Immigration Reform Like An ‘Oil Leak’
DeMint: We Should Treat Immigration Reform Like An ‘Oil Leak’
Last night, the Senate rejected Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-SC) amendment to the $59 billion supplemental spending bill asking for the completion of a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border within a year. Before the vote took place, DeMint attempted to persuade his colleagues to vote for his amendment by comparing the influx of undocumented immigrants to the deadly oil spill that is currently poisoning the Gulf of Mexico:
If any member of the Senate stood up today and said that we should not seal the oil leak in the Gulf until we have a comprehensive plan to clean it up, we would all say that that is absurd. Certainly we need to seal that leak as quickly as possible to minimize the cleanup later. But that is exactly the kind of logic that the President and my Democratic colleagues are using when it comes to immigration. They are insisting that we will not secure our borders until Republicans agree to a comprehensive plan with some form of amnesty and road to citizenship for those who have come here illegally.
Watch it:
Other than the fact that DeMint is offensively equating undocumented immigrants with a toxic gusher of oil, his insulting analogy doesn’t stand. Contrary to what Republicans might claim, there is not a constant flow of undocumented immigrants crossing the border every single second of the day. Immigration from Mexico to the U.S. slowed at least 40 percent between mid-decade and 2008. The Department of Homeland Security has documented that “the number of unauthorized immigrants living in the United States declined from 11.8 million in January 2007 to 11.6 million in January 2008.”
DeMint also attempted to emphasize the toxicity of immigration by citing the violent Mexican drug war. However, FBI statistics show that crime is declining in U.S. border towns across the U.S. Tim Wadsworth, a professor of sociology at the University of Colorado, studied U.S. cities with more than 50,000 people and found that “the cities that experience the greatest growth in immigration were the same one that were experiencing the greatest declines in violent crime.”
What’s absurd is that Republicans like DeMint would rather address the immigration issue with an ineffective and costly band-aid approach. DeMint has introduced similar failed amendments to the financial reform bill and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) $42.9 billion appropriations bill. DeMint was the fourth Republican border security amendment to fail in the past 24 hours. Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) was the only Republican who opposed it.
More at Wonk Room.
Rand Paul Endorses Obviously Unconstitutional Plan To End Birthright Citizenship
Rand Paul Endorses Obviously Unconstitutional Plan To End Birthright Citizenship
Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul is best known for radical anti-government views that lead him to oppose the federal ban on whites-only lunch counters, while claiming that governmental criticism of BP is “un-American.” Yet Paul’s hatred of all things government appears to end at the border. In an interview with a Russian television station, Paul calls for expansive levels of surveillance and unconstitutional attacks on Americans’ citizenship:
I recently have been talking more about satellite observation. They say you can sit in front of the store here and a satellite can read the headline on your newspaper. So I think you could also monitor your border with satellites, and then you just have to have some means of intercepting people who come in illegally. You could have helicopters stations positioned every couple of hundred miles. . .
We’re the only country I know of that allows people to come in illegally have a baby and then that baby becomes a citizen. And I think that should stop also.
Watch it:
It’s a bit amusing to see a self-described libertarian call for satellite-directed helicopter brigades to sweep down upon anyone who wanders too close to America’s southern border. It is not clear why Paul insists upon using wildly-expensive spy satellites to monitor the border when cheaper technology exists. But Paul’s call to end birthright citizenship, however, is by far the most radical aspect of his immigration plan because it conflicts with the express language of the Constitution.
Under the 14th Amendment, “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” This language is unambiguous; it grants citizenship to all persons born in the US unless they are not subject to American “jurisdiction” — a very narrow exception that applies only to children of foreign diplomats and a handful of other people. Moreover, in U.S. v Wong Kim Ark and again in Plyer v. Doe, the Supreme Court firmly rejected the notion that persons born in the US are not citizens, regardless of the immigration status of their parents.
Paul’s utter disregard for the Constitution’s plain text is particularly damning because, Paul justifies his radical opposition to cherished laws such as the Civil Rights Act by his false belief that such laws are unconstitutional. Like many conservatives, Paul subscribes to the “tenther” belief that the federal government lacks meaningful authority to regulate the national economy, and thus Congress is powerless against local businesses that want to exclude African-Americans or other disfavored groups.
Paul told NPR that every piece of legislation that Congress passes “should point to where in the Constitution they get the authority for it.” As his opposition to birthright citizenship indicates, however, he seems quite comfortable contravening the express words of the Constitution.
Gingrich Backs Down From Obama-Nazi Comparison: ‘I Recognize…The Evil Of The Nazi Regime’
Gingrich Backs Down From Obama-Nazi Comparison: ‘I Recognize…The Evil Of The Nazi Regime’
In his new book To Save America, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich repeatedly argues that the Obama administration and congressional Democrats make up a “secular-socialist machine” that “represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.” Since the book has come out, Gingrich has doubled down on this rhetoric, going on NBC and saying that the Obama administration is as much of a “threat” to America as brutal dictators like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were.
Everyone from Jewish groups to former GOP lawmakers to conservative journalists have criticized Gingrich for his comparison. Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace asked Gingrich whether what he was saying was “wildly over the top.” (Gingrich replied that it wasn’t.) Former GOP lawmaker Susan Molinari, who served while Gingrich was Speaker, went out of her way to distance herself from him, saying that to “compare anything that is going on in this country to the atrocities of Nazi Germany in any way, shape or form is just crazy.” MSNBC host and former GOP congressman Joe Scarborough called Gingrich’s comparison “shameful,” and the American Jewish Committee put out a statement urging the Republican Party to separate itself from Gingirich:
“By invoking the current Administration in the same breath as two murderous totalitarian states, Newt Gingrich has drawn a foolish and dangerous analogy,” said AJC Executive Director David Harris. “Gingrich’s linkage not only diminishes the horror of the Holocaust, it also licenses the use of extremist language in contemporary America.” [...]
“It is vital that the Republican leadership say clearly that such analogies are unacceptable,” Harris said. “Unfortunately, as the recent controversy over the new immigration law in Arizona also demonstrates, demonizing political opponents as Nazis is becoming all too common in American political debate.”
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) National Director Abe Foxman also sent Gingrich a letter on May 23, stating, “Regardless of how one feels about President Obama and his policies, comparing his administration — even indirectly — to Hitler’s Germany or Stalin’s Russia is profoundly offensive.” Yesterday, Gingrich sent Foxman a letter backing away from his earlier rhetoric:
As I told you on the phone, I recognize the horror and the evil of the Nazi regime and nothing in my new book To Save America should be interpreted as a statement of moral equivalence between totalitarian regimes and the secular-socialist left. My intent instead was to define the scale of the challenge to classic American civilization posed by secular-socialism.
Note that Gingrich has not yet apologized for his comparisons. Hopefully, however, his statement that there isn’t an “equivalence” between “totalitarian regimes and the secular-socialist left” means that going forward, he will no longer be making comparisons between Democrats and Nazis. In response to his call with Gingrich, Foxman said, “As we have said many times before, Holocaust or Nazi comparisons are inappropriate and have no place in American political discourse. After personally speaking with Newt, I believe that he understands this and will be more careful with his words in the future.”
ThinkFast: May 28, 2010
ThinkFast: May 28, 2010
The Afghanistan war is reaching two milestones, with the American death toll eclipsing 1,000 just as the conflict is set to pass Vietnam and become America’s longest-ever war. On June 7, the war will complete its 104th month.
BP’s CEO Tony Hayward, who has insisted that the oil spill’s impact on the Gulf would be “very, very modest,” finally conceded today that the ecological consequences will be far worse. He upgraded his assessment of the impact of the oil spill to an “environmental catastrophe.”
Journalists from publications like the New Orleans Times-Picayune, CBS News, and Mother Jones are “complaining that their efforts to document” the oil spill “are being thwarted by local and federal officials — working with BP — who are blocking access to the sites where the effects of the spill are most visible.” BP is also reportedly pressuring fishermen and charter boat captains to not work with the press.
Facing increasing criticism over his administration’s handling of the Gulf Coast oil spill, President Obama will head to Louisiana today to “review efforts.” The trip will be his second to the region since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and unleashed an environmental disaster.
House Republican leaders introduced a bill yesterday to “repeal and replace the sweeping health care law adopted in late March.” The measure would replace the Democratic Affordable Care Act with the plan Republicans offered in November. The bill is largely a “campaign tool,” as chances are “slim” that Republicans could even get a floor vote, let alone pass.
Ohio Radio Station Runs Contest To ‘Spend A Weekend Chasing Aliens’ In Phoenix
Ohio Radio Station Runs Contest To ‘Spend A Weekend Chasing Aliens’ In Phoenix
Last week, Columbus, OH Mayor Michael Coleman announced that he was banning city employees from traveling to Arizona on government business because of the state’s new anti-immigration law. “He agrees with those who want to send a message to the state of Arizona that this is not the American way,” Coleman’s spokesman said.
In response, a local radio station launched a contest to send a listener to Phoenix to “spend a weekend chasing aliens“:
610 WTVN would like to send you where Americans are proud and illegals are scared, sunny Phoenix, Arizona! You’ll spend a weekend chasing aliens and spending cash in the desert, just make sure you have your green card! Win round trip airfare to Phoenix, hotel accommodations, and a few pesos in spending cash — just register below! City employees encouraged to enter.
The ad for the contest on the website (which now says it is expired) features Coleman’s photo on a U.S. “Permanent Resident” card:
Central Ohio community leaders have called on the radio station to apologize for the promotion:
Community members will stand in solidarity and support the immigrant community and tell Columbus and Central Ohio to stand up to racial profiling and the racist remarks inferred by the WTVN 610 promotion.
“This is clearly the chilling effect of what is happening in Arizona with SB 1070”, we believe that our community must respect and protect all people”, commented Leonardo Ramos, President of Colombianos en Ohio.
This isn’t the first right-wing vigilante campaign that Arizona’s immigration law has spawned. A neo-Nazi group recently distributed fliers encouraging people to “Report An Illegal” on Cinco de Mayo. (HT: Raw Story)
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll