From @Huffpo. What a wuss.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) has canceled a speech he planned to give at the University of Pennsylvania on income inequality, due to the fact that many people who currently earn unequal incomes decided to attend. Because who knows? The subject matter may have been of particular interest to them, or something? Jake Sherman reports for Politico:
According to the report, Cantor had presumed that the speech would be something exclusively for the University of Pennsylvania community — specifically, as Cantor spokesman Brad Dayspring described, “students, faculty, alumni, and other[s].”
But according to The Hill, “Cantor’s office also said it learned Thursday night that university security planned to allow the first 300 people in line to attend the speech, regardless of affiliation, raising the possibility that Cantor would be addressing a room full of protesters.”The speech was to be titled “A Fair Shot at the American Dream and Economic Growth.”
That’s an odd subject to discuss exclusively in front of the University of Pennsylvania community, seeing as the fact that their status as students or alumni or professors at an elite Ivy League institution probably lends them the necessary insight to know they’ve all essentially received a “fair shot” at the “American dream.”
But the ongoing Occupy Philadelphia demonstrations are what tore it for Cantor, who decried the movement at this month’s Value Voters Summit. In a speech at that venue, Cantor said that he was growing “increasingly concerned about the growing mobs occupying Wall Street and the other cities across the country. And believe it or not, some in this town have actually condoned the pitting of Americans against Americans.” As Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show” pointed out, that’s a pretty ironic stance for Cantor to take, given the fact that when the Tea Party was the hot new thing in public protest, Cantor was giddily encouraging “mobs” to “pit themselves against Americans.”
Boy, you gotta love these guys. (No you don’t)
The smallest hint of pressure, and they run. From Town Halls, from speeches… no wonder they have lockers at Fox News. At least there they can get have the ideological equivalent of a make-out session regarding their views without having to fear the slightest difficult question.
It’s why these GOP debates have been so interesting. Unlike all their planned appearances, somebody actually challenges them on their ideas and statements. Sure, I’m disappointed Hermain Cain didn’t turn around and go “You don’t get to call me brother, not after that whole n*****head thing,” but it’s still intoxicating to watch.
But Cantor - after spending all of last year whipping the tea party into whatever fury he could, now weeps for the divided American that exists because of the #OWS movement. Or, if I may be more clear, Cantor doesn’t like the fact that people he disagrees with have started to learn how to be heard as well. It took a while. And the media wanted to ignore it. But they’re being heard.
And because there was a chance Cantor might have to hear them, he caved. Fingers in the ear. ”La La La,” taking his empty talking points and ran home to Washington.
Typical hard-right tool.: In the same way he only cares about debt when there’s a Democrat in office, he only cares about Freedom of Expression and a robust public debate when he’s sitting in a room with people who agree with him.
Back that day care center I’m partially funding… I mean, the House Of Representatives. .
I’ve been thinking a lot about Herman Cain. I used to be worried about him. Guess what? Now, as someone who is 99% sure he’s voting for Obama based on the current pack of lunatics running on the right, I am absolutely pulling for him.
But first, a little history:
Actress and activist Janeane Garofalo threw down the liberal gauntlet while blasting Tea Party motives on MSNBC in 2009
“It’s about hating a black man in the White House. That is racism straight up. This is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks,” she said.
A YouTube video titled “Tea Party Racism” shows signs seen at past Tea Party events. They include:
- Obama as a witch doctor
- A monkey face next to the words, “Obamanomics: Monkey See, Monkey Spend”
- Obama’s Plan: White Slavery
- The Zoo has an African Lion
- The White House has a Lyin’ African
Former President Jimmy Carter claimed to NBC “Nightly News” that “an overwhelming portion” of the animosity aimed at President Obama is because Obama’s black.
However, author Ron Miller doesn’t buy it. He’s written the book “Sellout,” which is a label often tossed at him because he’s a black Republican who speaks at Tea Party events.
He points out that two of the Tea Partiers favorite politicians are a black congressman and a black presidential candidate.
“If the Tea Party movement, fragmented as it is, had an opportunity to select the one man that they’d want as president of the United States right now, it would be Allen West and followed closely by Herman Cain,” he said.
“I simply say two things. First of all, the accusation of racism within the Tea Party movement is ridiculous. Why? Number two — the black guy keeps winning the straw polls. So how could they be racists?” Cain asked.
“Would a racist organization take that much interest and be that passionate about two men who are obviously black?” Miller asked.
Fox News commentator Juan Williams can often be a little suspicious about the Tea Party embrace of West and Cain.
“Maybe sensing that they are very vulnerable on this racial issue, they’re taking to people like West or like Herman Cain because they’re seeking to defend themselves against those charges,” he said.
But Williams said he wished people wouldn’t always be dragging out the race card.
“And I just find it abhorrent to American ideals that you would try to defeat your opponent with some blanket charge of racism or bigotry when in fact there’s something else on the table, and it’s a very legitimate difference of opinion,” he said.
“It’s not about race. It’s about policies, it’s about issues,” Miller told CBN News.
This was back in September when it was written, long before Cain was elevated to the status of front runner, whatever that means in the pack of dimwits, zealots and snoozers the GOP is running. Man, they thought it would be easy, didn’t they?
And I’m okay with that. Because here’s who runs against Obama if Cain gets the nomination:
Herman Cain is heartlessly out of touch with main stream America: (statement about Occupy Wallstreet)
“Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself. It is not someone’s fault if they succeeded, it is someone’s fault if they failed,” the ex-Godfather’s Pizza CEO declared.
Hermain Cain is a typical right-leaning islamophobe:
He had to apologize to Muslim leaders for vitriolic remarks in which he said communities have a right to ban mosques because Muslims are trying to inject sharia law into the U.S. and that he would not want a Muslim bent on killing Americans in his administration.
And yet for all for his issues with Islam being used to make law in America, he’s willing to his faith to make law here:
“I believe that life begins at conception, period. And that means that I will have to see enough evidence that someone I would appoint shares that same view. “
And, of course, Hermain Cain is a mouth piece for the uber-rich:
IOWA CITY, Iowa — Republican presidential hopeful Herman Cain has cast himself as the outsider, the pizza magnate with real-world experience who will bring fresh ideas to the nation’s capital. But Cain’s economic ideas, support and organization have close ties to two billionaire brothers who bankroll right-leaning causes through their group Americans for Prosperity.
Cain’s campaign manager and a number of aides have worked for Americans for Prosperity, or AFP, the advocacy group founded with support from billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, which lobbies for lower taxes and less government regulation and spending. Cain credits a businessman who served on an AFP advisory board with helping devise his “9-9-9” plan to rewrite the nation’s tax code. And his years of speaking at AFP events have given the businessman and radio host a network of loyal grassroots fans.
So how does this guy rise to the top of the polls? Why is everybody talking about him?
Because, as Juan Williams suspects, Hermain Cain is a human shield for the Tea Party. The perfect defense against what Janeane Garofalo (and many others, including myself) have stated a long time ago: There’s a sick little undercurrent of racism going on in the tea party, and something had to be done to deflect.
To me, this is what it’s about: Being able to keep the hard-right agenda going, but neutering the race card. How many days did Rick Perry’s “N*****head” story get? A day and a half? The Texas Governor’s family getaway uses the N-word and this carries the news cycle less than 48 hours? C’mon, If Obama went to the Cracker Barrel for a soda, we’d hear about how he was calling white people “Crackers” through November.
What better way for the tea party to go “See? We’re not bigots!” than elevating Herman? It’s beautiful, beautiful strategy. And I hope it backfires.
I have grown to love Hermain Cain as the Republican Candidate for the United States of America. Do you hear me? I love him having to go toe-to-toe with Obama.
Because the election becomes race neutral. Obama’s skin color suddenly is no longer in the “plus” column for that bigoted chunk of Americans who don’t like a president who doesn’t look like their money — even if they don’t HAVE any money.
And if Cain wins the nomination, pow: Their party ALSO has a candidate with the same skin color. Now it’s about ideas. And who best represents the majority of Americans.
So for now, I’m pulling for him. Taking race out of this election is a PR move for the Tea Party. But it’s one of the best things that could happen to Obama. It makes this election about policies, the direction of the country, and who has the best interest for the majority of Americans.
So go, Herman. Go.
But honestly, by the time the GOP candidate is chosen, I think we all know he’ll be gone, Herman, gone.
Enjoy actual marines, telling chicken hawks like Sean Hannity, how they really feel.
Not safe for kids, not safe for work.
Thanks, Hank Williams. There’s a difference between playing to your audience and revealing what an asshat you are.
I want to hear Hank Williams talk about politics like I want some turd I squeeze out to work on my 401K.
Enjoy working the same circuit with Victoria Jackson, you ridiculous inbred tool.
Great piece from Media Matters that will be dismissed as not mattering by the media.
What If Occupy Wall Street Had A Cable News Sponsor?
September 29, 2011 9:08 am ET by Eric Boehlert
Closing in on its second week of ongoing protests, Occupy Wall Street continues to raise hackles in downtown Manhattan as street-bound activists rally to end joblessness, stop political corruption, curb health profiteering and to bring an end to wars.
Despite a successful and persistent vigil, the absence of mainstream news coverage over the last ten days has been striking, particularly since the protest are unfolding in the media capital of the world. And particularly since a grassroots uprising on the political right in 2009 was instantly rewarded with endless new coverage. Indeed, Fox News virtually sponsored the entire Tea Party movement.
So far, Occupy Wall Street has had no such luck.
A quick check of Nexis indicates that between September 17-27, Occupy Wall Street was reported on just two dozen times by the cable news channels. That averages out to less than one report each day by each of the 24-hour news outlets. (Note: Nexis does not track MSNBC or Fox News daytime programming.)
Other media have been equally uninterested. The three major network news organizations have done their best to boycott the protest story, each airing just a single report over the same ten-day span. Meanwhile, one hometown New York Times columnist dismissed the Wall Street activists as trying to “pantomime progressivism rather than practicing it knowledgeably.”
As The New York Observer observed, “Occupy Wall Street’s first media problem was that there was no media.” Mark Jurkowitz from Pew’s Project for Excellence in Journalism confirmed “the story thus far hasn’t seemed to gain any real traction in the mainstream media.” And Current TV’s Keith Olbermannargued persuasively that if Tea Party activists camped out on Wall Street protesting Ben Bernanke, that would be the lead story every night on the network news.
So why the media blank stares for Occupy Wall Street? A news executive at NPR explained that the network hadn’t covered the protests during the first ten days because they did not “involve large numbers of people, prominent people, a great disruption or an especially clear objective.” (NPR’s relented this week; “All things Considered” finally reported on Occupy Wall Street.)
Question: Doesn’t NPR’s description of Occupy Wall Street almost perfectly capture the early days of the Tea Party when conservative activists had little trouble getting journalists to cover ant-Obama rallies?
Yet NPR’s not-impressed editorial outlook seemed to mirror much of the media’s reaction. That, despite the fact there’s deep supports for cracking down on Wall Street.
As blogger Michael Zackman pointed out:
After all, polls show that many Americans would be interested in the marchers’ arguments. A Pew Research Center poll shows that “nearly half of Americans — 47 percent — say Wall Street hurts the nation’s economy more than it helps.” According to a Bloomberg poll, a whopping “70 percent of Americans say big bonuses should be banned this year at Wall Street firms that took taxpayer bailouts.” In another poll conducted by Lake Research Partners, 77 percent of respondents approved of tougher rules for Wall Street.
So it’s not as if Wall Street protesters represent the radical fringe of American politics. In fact, you could argue the protests are tapping into populist rage simmering nationwide.
Sort of like the Tea Party (we’re told) tapped into populism.
And that’s why I can’t help wondering what the Wall Street protests would look like today if it had been covered nationally, in-depth, over and over again, on a daily basis by key news outlets. I’m wondering what Occupy Wall Street would look like if a major all-news channel took over sponsorship of the event and aggressively marketed the movement on behalf of liberals.
In other words, what would the Occupy Wall Street protests look like if they were embraced the way cable news embraced the protest-based Tea Party? Keep in mind, during a key ten-day span of activity between April 9-19, 2009, the cable news channels reported more than 100 times about the fledgling Tea Party. That’s four times the amount of attention they’ve given to Occupy Wall Street this month.
Recall that the Tea Party movement was (theoretically) born on CNBC, when reporter Rick Santelli started ranting about Obama on the floor of the Chicago stock exchange, warning viewers the new Democratic president was steering the country towards a Castro-like Cuban economy. CNBC then hyped the clip incessantly (“Shot Heard Around The Word”/”Santelli’s Manifesto”), while NBC led the evening news that night with the cable clip from its sister station, announcing Santelli’s rant to struck a “populist” chord. (In fact, polling at the time suggested a strong majority of Americans supported the Obama plan to stem foreclosures; the plan Santelli had railed against.)
Fox News then quickly claimed ownership of the anti-Obama movement, providing free publicly and advertising for the right-wing rallies.
As MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow noted in 2009, Fox News was “officially promoting” the movement, which was putting it mildly. Fox News didn’t just promote the Tea Party, Fox News became its turnkey marketing and publicity machine. Fox News, with its millions of dollars in production value and tens of millions of dollars in free airtime, took a grassroots anti-Obama movement and injected it with cable TV steroids.
Media Matters noted at the time:
Specifically, Fox News has in dozens of instances provided attendance and organizing information for future protests, such as protest dates, locations and website URLs. Fox News websites have also posted information and publicity material for protests. …Tea-party organizers have used the planned attendance of the Fox News hosts to promote their protests. Fox News has also aired numerous interviews with protest organizers.
More?
-A Fox producer urged protesters to cheer louder just before live remote shots.
-Its host offered to tape his TV program at an Tea Party event, charge admission to the taping, and then donate all the proceeds to far-right activists. (After significant outrage, Fox executives were forced to cancel that plan.)
-Fox News aired so much effusive footage that Tea Party organizers gushed to supporters about the “great television news coverage” the protests had received.
—The channel boosted rally attendance by dispatching hosts to appear in-person in front of Tea Party crowds.
—Declaring ownership, Fox unveiled “FNC Tax Day Tea Parties” label.
—It urged viewers to send in their protest videos to be posted online.
Fast forward to just this month and CNN, in an odd piece of branding (pandering?), joined forces with the Tea Party to sponsor a Republican debate. Yet today, an emerging grassroots rebellion on Wall Street remains largely ignored by the same cable outlets.
Imagine what Occupy Wall Street would look like if it not only received its fair share of media coverage, but if a national cable TV channel stepped up and sponsored the political uprisings.
Occupy Wall Street would look very different today.
Please. That’s like a post going “Movie Shock: Michael Bay Blows Things Up.”
The shock would have been had he been respected for his service and treated like a human being because of his sexual orientation.
Wake me when one of these people becomes the person that needs to be defeated, will you? Because I don’t have the stomach for this.
And in equally shocking news, the color blue remains BLUE. Did anybody NOT know this?
Read the obvious:
Two Fox News hosts admitted on Wednesday that they have sometimes held back from criticizing Sarah Palin because she is their “coworker.”
Greg Gutfeld and Bob Beckel, co-hosts of Fox News’ 5 PM show “The Five,” were discussing Palin—who makes at least $1 million a year as a Fox News contributor—on the show Tuesday. Gutfeld, who also hosts the late night show “Red Eye,” said he felt awkward whenever the subject came up.
“The only problem with talking about Sarah Palin is that she works here, and it’s like a coworker,” he said. “And if I say something bad and I see her in the hallway I feel really awkward and wrong. So I just kind of say, ‘that was a good job!’”
Beckel agreed.
“It has nothing to do with that,” he said. “It has everything to do with your paycheck. That’s why you feel awkward. I know exactly what you mean. I’ll be honest, I’ve pulled my punches.”
Yes.
Because right after the controversy was “put to rest” (except, you know, by the people who need to negate the election) Donald Trump said “We need to look at his grades and see if he was a good enough student to get into Harvard Law School.”
He continues with: “That’s just code for saying ‘He got into Harvard Law School because he’s black.’ “
Except, it’s not really code. It’s saying exactly that.
Keep in mind this is said by the same Trump who’s kids are on his show and part of his organization for no other reason than they fell out of the trump family hoo-hoo.
Yes, this is exactly the guy I want discussing opportunity and who gets a fair shake.
So gross. So very, very gross.
Shun.
Shun A Birther Event: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=170438076343078
FB page: http://www.facebook.com/TheMarmelPage
