Kevin Koster commented on Monica Crowley: Fast And Furious A Conspiracy To Undermine The Second Amendment
2012-06-23 17:22:28 -0400
· Flag
Bruce, thank you for your apology. I was referring to the end of your first post where you made descriptions of President Obama and AG Holder.
I’m glad to know you were critical of the Bush Admin for their unfortunate treatment of the people involved in the warrantless wiretapping, not to mention the attacks on the Wilsons. Good to know you stood up for them.
I did read your citations. That’s how I knew what they were. And that some were literally reprinting, word for word, what was in a Fox News article. As you did with the list of guys Fox News says were retaliated against. Since you did not answer this, I’ll accept that you understand you’ve conceded that point, as you did the truth about the killing of Agent Brian Terry.
The LA times article re Trevino notes his allegation of 150 deaths is unfounded, and has a critical comment from an ATF agent on the other side which says Trevino, the former AG now working as a lower level politician, Just has “a good political thing to say”.
I was trying to spare you any indignity of refuting all of your statements. You unfortunately left me no other option. I have read your opinions and the unfounded basis on which you made them. I don’t know how to help if you don’t want to hear the appropriate response.
I’m glad to know you were critical of the Bush Admin for their unfortunate treatment of the people involved in the warrantless wiretapping, not to mention the attacks on the Wilsons. Good to know you stood up for them.
I did read your citations. That’s how I knew what they were. And that some were literally reprinting, word for word, what was in a Fox News article. As you did with the list of guys Fox News says were retaliated against. Since you did not answer this, I’ll accept that you understand you’ve conceded that point, as you did the truth about the killing of Agent Brian Terry.
The LA times article re Trevino notes his allegation of 150 deaths is unfounded, and has a critical comment from an ATF agent on the other side which says Trevino, the former AG now working as a lower level politician, Just has “a good political thing to say”.
I was trying to spare you any indignity of refuting all of your statements. You unfortunately left me no other option. I have read your opinions and the unfounded basis on which you made them. I don’t know how to help if you don’t want to hear the appropriate response.
Kevin Koster commented on Sean Hannity Exploits Brian Terry’s Parents For Fast And Furious Political Hay
2012-06-22 12:35:04 -0400
· Flag
This is really shameful. And by the way, I would say the same about pundits from either side trotting out parents of slain victims just to try to score cheap political points. And no, Hannity doesn’t really care about this couple. If he did, he would have known the facts and not just made all those cheap and wrong statements while trying to goad the Terrys into singing his song.
Kevin Koster commented on On Hannity, Rep. Steve King Pretends Fast And Furious Is President Obama’s Watergate
2012-06-21 18:27:29 -0400
· Flag
Let’s see. Hannity has already rung this bell at least twice. With the Joe Sestak matter as Ellen properly recalls. With the nonsensical “leaks” scandal. Maybe even with the silly attempts to make hay out of Solyndra. And now with the latest salvo in Darrell Issa’s latest embarrassment.
The reality is that Issa has been on a fishing expedition for more than a year. He asks for documents that he knows he isn’t entitled to see, since they impact current investigations, and then throws temper tantrums in public when he’s reminded that he’s out of line. Issa has changed up his requests repeatedly, in an effort to keep this storyline alive for the election. It’s no wonder after Issa threw yet another tantrum that Holder asked the President to simply declare the privilege to stop the fishing expedition.
Keep in mind that Holder specifically met with Issa and more level headed Congressmen on Tuesday to settle the matter, once again reminding Issa of something he should not have needed to know: that he doesn’t have the authority to override the Justice Department on current investigations. Instead of humbly acknowledging that he can’t accomplish anything more here, Issa chose to throw another public tantrum, crying that he wasn’t getting his way. At that point, Holder called his bluff.
Issa knows that even if the House votes to hold Holder in contempt, it would be on a purely party line vote, leaving the GOP unable to do anything with the vote. And it would be obvious to the public what game is being played.
Ellen is correct that this is just the latest witch hunt against Holder, who has had to endure what may be a record number of personal and professional attacks practically since being sworn in. The GOP has a serious obsession with humiliating him and driving him from office. Since they can’t achieve the latter, they’re hoping that repeatedly trying the former will cause Holder to somehow run away.
And yes, this is partly revenge for the fact that Holder has called the GOP on multiple bad constitutional calls. His Justice Dept attys fought the various attacks on immigrants and voting rights, two areas the GOP was hoping its staunch radio and tv shouters could get them an easy walk. And those moves we’re clearly intended to intimidate and disillusion potential Obama voters. Holder’s interference has certainly angered some GOP flamethrowers.
This is also revenge for the prosecution of I. “Scooter” Libby and the near-miss on a prosecution of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney over their criminal behavior re Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. And let’s keep the facts in mind: Plame was a NOC (undercover agent) working for the CIA while posing as a state dept staffer. She was known to have worked with the CIA in terms of state dept briefings but was not publicly known to be managing intelligence assets overseas. Exposing her was meant by Rove and Cheney to be a message to her husband about how vulnerable he could be. So multiple Bush Admin staffers including Libby and Richard Armitage were tasked with getting a “line of the day” out to various reporters.
Libby knew the reality of Plame’s status but exposed her anyway out of deference to his boss, Cheney, and out of spite against Wilson and his wife. Other staffers, like Armitage, didn’t know the truth about Plame, and thus just repeated what they thought was public knowledge. The result was that Plame’s career was ruined and her assets were likely lost or killed by foreign agents. We’ll never know as all of that was classified CIA material. But in the aftermath, the Wilson’s moved to an undisclosed location and Joe Wilson called publicly for Rove to be "frog marched out of the White House.
During the ensuing investigation, Armitage cooperated but couldn’t name anyone other than Libby, and made clear that he didn’t know about the NOC status. Libby, on the other hand, lied repeatedly in order to stall the investigation and protect Cheney and Rove. His ploy worked, and he wound up getting convicted of obstruction and perjury, the sentence for which Bush commuted, which insured that Libby could never testify about the matter.
The point is that the Plame matter really was a criminal matter and a very serious one. Ironically, the laws broken were actually GOP revenge for CIA whistleblowers like Philip Agee and John Stockwell writing books about the CIA in the 70s and 80s. The GOP never dreamed that would come back to bite them, but that’s life.
Fast and Furious isn’t a criminal matter. It’s a discussion about a mistaken Bush Admin ATF idea the Obama people didn’t terminate in time. This is already being investigated by Justice Dept staffers. And yes, Brian Terry was killed in an shoot out where a couple of these guns turned up. (I don’t know that he was killed by those guns. I doubt it, or the GOP would be waving that around too.).
The Plame matter and Watergate really were criminal matters, as was the Iran-Contra situation. The fact that that the GOP and Fox News seem unable to see the truth about that speaks to how desperate they’re getting the closer we get to November. Issa is in a real bind now. By pressing this button, he’s left himself no way to save face.
The reality is that Issa has been on a fishing expedition for more than a year. He asks for documents that he knows he isn’t entitled to see, since they impact current investigations, and then throws temper tantrums in public when he’s reminded that he’s out of line. Issa has changed up his requests repeatedly, in an effort to keep this storyline alive for the election. It’s no wonder after Issa threw yet another tantrum that Holder asked the President to simply declare the privilege to stop the fishing expedition.
Keep in mind that Holder specifically met with Issa and more level headed Congressmen on Tuesday to settle the matter, once again reminding Issa of something he should not have needed to know: that he doesn’t have the authority to override the Justice Department on current investigations. Instead of humbly acknowledging that he can’t accomplish anything more here, Issa chose to throw another public tantrum, crying that he wasn’t getting his way. At that point, Holder called his bluff.
Issa knows that even if the House votes to hold Holder in contempt, it would be on a purely party line vote, leaving the GOP unable to do anything with the vote. And it would be obvious to the public what game is being played.
Ellen is correct that this is just the latest witch hunt against Holder, who has had to endure what may be a record number of personal and professional attacks practically since being sworn in. The GOP has a serious obsession with humiliating him and driving him from office. Since they can’t achieve the latter, they’re hoping that repeatedly trying the former will cause Holder to somehow run away.
And yes, this is partly revenge for the fact that Holder has called the GOP on multiple bad constitutional calls. His Justice Dept attys fought the various attacks on immigrants and voting rights, two areas the GOP was hoping its staunch radio and tv shouters could get them an easy walk. And those moves we’re clearly intended to intimidate and disillusion potential Obama voters. Holder’s interference has certainly angered some GOP flamethrowers.
This is also revenge for the prosecution of I. “Scooter” Libby and the near-miss on a prosecution of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney over their criminal behavior re Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. And let’s keep the facts in mind: Plame was a NOC (undercover agent) working for the CIA while posing as a state dept staffer. She was known to have worked with the CIA in terms of state dept briefings but was not publicly known to be managing intelligence assets overseas. Exposing her was meant by Rove and Cheney to be a message to her husband about how vulnerable he could be. So multiple Bush Admin staffers including Libby and Richard Armitage were tasked with getting a “line of the day” out to various reporters.
Libby knew the reality of Plame’s status but exposed her anyway out of deference to his boss, Cheney, and out of spite against Wilson and his wife. Other staffers, like Armitage, didn’t know the truth about Plame, and thus just repeated what they thought was public knowledge. The result was that Plame’s career was ruined and her assets were likely lost or killed by foreign agents. We’ll never know as all of that was classified CIA material. But in the aftermath, the Wilson’s moved to an undisclosed location and Joe Wilson called publicly for Rove to be "frog marched out of the White House.
During the ensuing investigation, Armitage cooperated but couldn’t name anyone other than Libby, and made clear that he didn’t know about the NOC status. Libby, on the other hand, lied repeatedly in order to stall the investigation and protect Cheney and Rove. His ploy worked, and he wound up getting convicted of obstruction and perjury, the sentence for which Bush commuted, which insured that Libby could never testify about the matter.
The point is that the Plame matter really was a criminal matter and a very serious one. Ironically, the laws broken were actually GOP revenge for CIA whistleblowers like Philip Agee and John Stockwell writing books about the CIA in the 70s and 80s. The GOP never dreamed that would come back to bite them, but that’s life.
Fast and Furious isn’t a criminal matter. It’s a discussion about a mistaken Bush Admin ATF idea the Obama people didn’t terminate in time. This is already being investigated by Justice Dept staffers. And yes, Brian Terry was killed in an shoot out where a couple of these guns turned up. (I don’t know that he was killed by those guns. I doubt it, or the GOP would be waving that around too.).
The Plame matter and Watergate really were criminal matters, as was the Iran-Contra situation. The fact that that the GOP and Fox News seem unable to see the truth about that speaks to how desperate they’re getting the closer we get to November. Issa is in a real bind now. By pressing this button, he’s left himself no way to save face.
Kevin Koster commented on Fast And Furious - Open Thread And Live Blog
2012-06-21 17:25:16 -0400
· Flag
I’m still not sure Boehner wants to embarrass himself with a public vote on this. I think he’s sticking up for Issa in public, but will do what he can to avoid having to go through what will be a pointless waste of Congress’ time. Since we know this would be a completely party line vote, I don’t think the GOP gets any moral ground from doing it. It would just be yet another public black eye during an election year when they can’t afford it.
Kevin Koster commented on Bernard Goldberg Really Needs To Pay More Attention To Fox News If He Thinks There’s No Racism In Obama Criticism
2012-06-19 23:34:29 -0400
· Flag
There is a casually smug racism in the whole tone of the remarks here. Goldberg’s attempt to psychoanalyze Sam Donaldson for his “liberal white guilt” is the same pablum the right wing tried in 2008. When they said Obama was only getting good poll numbers because liberals wanted to tell pollsters a lie about voting for a black president. And then when they explained Obama’s victory with the idea that liberals oly voted for him because he was black. And now, after 3+ years of nonsense like the birther ideas and total GOP intransigence, they want to dredge this canard up again?
I’ve heard plenty of subtle racist digs at Obama, all the way from the idea that he couldn’t have gotten into Harvard by being a good student. And I’ve heard the more direct stuff, including various references to lynching.
That said, Goldberg is correct to note that we’re at a real low point in civility when people celebrate Neil Munro’s antics or celebrate Bush having shoes thrown at him. That kind of thing smacks of “I like it when it happens to the other team’s guy” which gets us nowhere in the end.
I’ve heard plenty of subtle racist digs at Obama, all the way from the idea that he couldn’t have gotten into Harvard by being a good student. And I’ve heard the more direct stuff, including various references to lynching.
That said, Goldberg is correct to note that we’re at a real low point in civility when people celebrate Neil Munro’s antics or celebrate Bush having shoes thrown at him. That kind of thing smacks of “I like it when it happens to the other team’s guy” which gets us nowhere in the end.
Kevin Koster commented on Daily Caller’s Neil Munro Gets A Dose Of Hannity’s Republican Rehab
2012-06-19 08:41:42 -0400
· Flag
Munro clearly had no intention of waiting for President Obama to finish his statement. He wanted to get in his gotcha remark while Obama was caught in the cameras. And his repeated interjections arguing with Obama prove this. I’m not surprised that Bernie Goldberg found it despicable. Nor am I surprised that Sean Hannity would try to justify it.
Kevin Koster commented on Lou Dobbs Calls Obama Immigration Heckler Refreshing
2012-06-17 01:48:02 -0400
· Flag
I really have to wonder why this kind of thing is becoming the norm. First we have Joe Wilson screaming “You lie!” in the middle of a State of the Union address. Then we have Samuel Alito mouthing something similar. Then we have the endless parade of insults for President Obama – to the tune that either he wasn’t born in the country, or didn’t get good grades or whatever other nonsense they want to throw out.
And now we have this guy from the Daily Caller doing his best to disrupt a speaking appearance by the President, and then trying to argue the point afterward. Munro’s excuse rings quite hollow – he knew full well what he was doing, and went ahead anyway. He wasn’t trying to get in a question – he was trying to ask a “gotcha”, and felt it was a good enough hit that he could forego even waiting for the President to finish his remarks.
And now we have this guy from the Daily Caller doing his best to disrupt a speaking appearance by the President, and then trying to argue the point afterward. Munro’s excuse rings quite hollow – he knew full well what he was doing, and went ahead anyway. He wasn’t trying to get in a question – he was trying to ask a “gotcha”, and felt it was a good enough hit that he could forego even waiting for the President to finish his remarks.
Kevin Koster commented on Dr. Laura Berman Pwns Laura Ingraham Over Planned Parenthood In LA School
2012-06-16 13:18:13 -0400
· Flag
Jane, I have to acknowledge that your response was deeply thought-out and well presented.
I would still have to go with a basic rule that the person who should be in charge of what to do about a pregnancy is the person who is pregnant, in consultation with her doctor. Imposing a moral judgment by someone else unfortunately puts that woman into a position that has less to do with medical issues and more to do with the outside person’s opinion of the woman’s lifestyle and choices.
We also need to be aware that taking away the legal choice of abortion for most women will not mean that they will not get pregnant. It just means that the situation will revert to what it was before Roe v Wade, where some places were known to be legal locations for it, and other places saw a lot of unsafe makeshift abortions which were dangerous to the women involved. There’s a reason those were referred to as “back alley” abortions. Attempting to reimpose that scenario in the 21st century strikes me as an untenable option.
I would be very happy if more people would pursue abstinence and chastity, and devote themselves to a single mate for their whole lives. I agree that we are in an age where marriage as an institution is no longer as much of a core value as it was fifty years ago. But we should also be aware that fifty and even one hundred years ago and longer, people were not simply chaste and abstinent up to the day of marriage. Some were, and some even practice that philosophy today. Most were not. And while I can happily point to many couples who have enjoyed long marriages, I can unfortunately point to many more who have not. Couples who married young and then realized ten years later that this was not the person they wished to spend the next fifty wiht. Couples who had children in an effort to keep the marriage together, only to find themselves working out a situation of divorced parents sharing custody.
I agree that sex education that consists of wink-wink, nod-nod will do very little to help a teenager understand some basic information everyone should have. But just telling teenagers “You shouldn’t do this until you’re prepared to spend the rest of your life with this person” will not address the situation either. I think there’s a middle ground – where you can address the very real health issues, and the very real emotional and societal ramifications of sexual activity. Again, more information is better than less information.
I don’t know anyone who wants a ten year old child to be engaging in this kind of activity. Among other reasons, that’s before the child has even gone through puberty. However, if we’re talking about a sixteen year old teenager who is dealing with all the raging hormones of that age, isn’t it a better idea to address the situation rather than just telling that teenager “Just say no”?
I believe that what Laura Berman was trying to say, repeatedly, was that the notion of abstinence-only education was tried for 8 years under the GW Bush administration. It did not lower the numbers of teen pregnancies or teen STDs. The numbers went up. She agrees that abstinence-BASED education is the way to go, as it acknowledges what is really happening while trying to provide some basic guidance. Guidance, I might add, that should have been provided by the parents and many times is not.
I would still have to go with a basic rule that the person who should be in charge of what to do about a pregnancy is the person who is pregnant, in consultation with her doctor. Imposing a moral judgment by someone else unfortunately puts that woman into a position that has less to do with medical issues and more to do with the outside person’s opinion of the woman’s lifestyle and choices.
We also need to be aware that taking away the legal choice of abortion for most women will not mean that they will not get pregnant. It just means that the situation will revert to what it was before Roe v Wade, where some places were known to be legal locations for it, and other places saw a lot of unsafe makeshift abortions which were dangerous to the women involved. There’s a reason those were referred to as “back alley” abortions. Attempting to reimpose that scenario in the 21st century strikes me as an untenable option.
I would be very happy if more people would pursue abstinence and chastity, and devote themselves to a single mate for their whole lives. I agree that we are in an age where marriage as an institution is no longer as much of a core value as it was fifty years ago. But we should also be aware that fifty and even one hundred years ago and longer, people were not simply chaste and abstinent up to the day of marriage. Some were, and some even practice that philosophy today. Most were not. And while I can happily point to many couples who have enjoyed long marriages, I can unfortunately point to many more who have not. Couples who married young and then realized ten years later that this was not the person they wished to spend the next fifty wiht. Couples who had children in an effort to keep the marriage together, only to find themselves working out a situation of divorced parents sharing custody.
I agree that sex education that consists of wink-wink, nod-nod will do very little to help a teenager understand some basic information everyone should have. But just telling teenagers “You shouldn’t do this until you’re prepared to spend the rest of your life with this person” will not address the situation either. I think there’s a middle ground – where you can address the very real health issues, and the very real emotional and societal ramifications of sexual activity. Again, more information is better than less information.
I don’t know anyone who wants a ten year old child to be engaging in this kind of activity. Among other reasons, that’s before the child has even gone through puberty. However, if we’re talking about a sixteen year old teenager who is dealing with all the raging hormones of that age, isn’t it a better idea to address the situation rather than just telling that teenager “Just say no”?
I believe that what Laura Berman was trying to say, repeatedly, was that the notion of abstinence-only education was tried for 8 years under the GW Bush administration. It did not lower the numbers of teen pregnancies or teen STDs. The numbers went up. She agrees that abstinence-BASED education is the way to go, as it acknowledges what is really happening while trying to provide some basic guidance. Guidance, I might add, that should have been provided by the parents and many times is not.
Kevin Koster commented on The Eric Holder Witch Hunt Is An Opening Act For The 2012 Election
2012-06-14 14:18:27 -0400
· Flag
The whole “voter fraud” canard is code for voter suppression. The intent is to make sure that certain people are intimidated away from the polls and thus cannot cast ballots against GOP candidates.
I would track some of this all the way back to Florida in 2000, when Fox prematurely called the state and the election for Bush. I went to sleep at 130am thinking that Bush had been elected, and woke up at 5am to see that it was back in limbo.
There was plenty of evidence of voter suppression in Florida in 2000, as has been documented. The attempted recounts and the circus surrounding them only exacerbated the situation there. I remember at the time the GOP was making noises about recounting other states, like New Mexico, if they didn’t get their way in Florida. When the Supreme Court cancelled the recount and gave the election to Bush, the GOP magically dropped their concern for the voters of New Mexico, since they no longer needed them.
The wildest part of what happened in Florida is that in the only statewide recount ever done, Al Gore was shown to have won the state by some 72 votes. Gore would not have won a recount of just the 4 counties he cherry-picked, but he did win the full recount. But by the time this count was done, 9/11 had already happened and the Dems did not want to make any more hay out of it.
I also remember hearing about voter suppression in Ohio in 2004 – about people waiting for hours in the rain to vote, or being sent away from the polls. But in 2004, Bush had enough votes in Ohio to convincinly take it – which of course gave him the election. It wasn’t a landslide by any means (certainly not the landslide the GOP was predicting) but the swing votes gave Bush just enough to stay in office another 4 years. Which unfortunately resulted in the things he did then…
I would track some of this all the way back to Florida in 2000, when Fox prematurely called the state and the election for Bush. I went to sleep at 130am thinking that Bush had been elected, and woke up at 5am to see that it was back in limbo.
There was plenty of evidence of voter suppression in Florida in 2000, as has been documented. The attempted recounts and the circus surrounding them only exacerbated the situation there. I remember at the time the GOP was making noises about recounting other states, like New Mexico, if they didn’t get their way in Florida. When the Supreme Court cancelled the recount and gave the election to Bush, the GOP magically dropped their concern for the voters of New Mexico, since they no longer needed them.
The wildest part of what happened in Florida is that in the only statewide recount ever done, Al Gore was shown to have won the state by some 72 votes. Gore would not have won a recount of just the 4 counties he cherry-picked, but he did win the full recount. But by the time this count was done, 9/11 had already happened and the Dems did not want to make any more hay out of it.
I also remember hearing about voter suppression in Ohio in 2004 – about people waiting for hours in the rain to vote, or being sent away from the polls. But in 2004, Bush had enough votes in Ohio to convincinly take it – which of course gave him the election. It wasn’t a landslide by any means (certainly not the landslide the GOP was predicting) but the swing votes gave Bush just enough to stay in office another 4 years. Which unfortunately resulted in the things he did then…
Kevin Koster commented on Malkin Smears Juan Williams’ Professionalism
2012-06-14 14:09:10 -0400
· Flag
This was one of the times where Williams actually stood up for himself, correcting Hannity repeatedly on the outright falsehoods that were being presented.
Hannity and Malkin did everything they could to pump up the current non-scandal while dismissing the very real Wilson/Plame scandal, and Williams corrected them at each turn.
When Malkin couldn’t handle it, she resorted to childish name-calling and sing-song remarks. Williams responded by reminding her that real journalists behave differently, which of course sent her to Mars.
Hannity in his own turn was reduced to repeatedly shouting that “Holder’s gone! He’ll be fired before November!” And Williams again got the last word on that one, pointing out that just because Hannity wants that to happen doesn’t mean it will.
Hannity and Malkin did everything they could to pump up the current non-scandal while dismissing the very real Wilson/Plame scandal, and Williams corrected them at each turn.
When Malkin couldn’t handle it, she resorted to childish name-calling and sing-song remarks. Williams responded by reminding her that real journalists behave differently, which of course sent her to Mars.
Hannity in his own turn was reduced to repeatedly shouting that “Holder’s gone! He’ll be fired before November!” And Williams again got the last word on that one, pointing out that just because Hannity wants that to happen doesn’t mean it will.
Kevin Koster commented on Doocy Cheers On Republican Calls For Eric Holder's Resignation
2012-06-13 15:09:44 -0400
· Flag
This bit of cheerleading followed enthusiastic fist bumps last night from O’Reilly, Hannity and Van Susteren. All three shows happily showed the clip of Cornyn getting on his high horse, while editing out as much of Holder’s response as possible.
The actual full statements by both indicate that Cornyn was trying to get as many nasty attacks at Holder as he could while he had the mike. Holder began to respond and Cornyn shouted him down. When Cornyn finished his tantrum, Holder responded with what I view as a tremendous amount of self control, pointing out that the tantrum was full of a “breathtaking” number of untrue statements.
The O’Reilly debate between Colmes and Crowley that followed was instructive. Crowley actually admitted that she didn’t see Holder being forced from office. (And she’s right. He won’t be.) Colmes made the points both that the Fast & Furious witch hunt is just that, and that the current scandal is intended as revenge for the Wilson/Plame scandal rather than being motivated by any real basis. O’Reilly still headlined his segment that Holder was being pushed to resign, which belied the point that the suggestion was coming from the usual GOP suspects that have been harrassing Holder since day one. As a special touch, O’Reilly tried to catch Colmes off guard by asking about the Marc Rich pardon of 2000 under Bill Clinton. Colmes wasn’t on his game fast enough to note that Scooter Libby was Rich’s lawyer for almost the wholee time.
The actual full statements by both indicate that Cornyn was trying to get as many nasty attacks at Holder as he could while he had the mike. Holder began to respond and Cornyn shouted him down. When Cornyn finished his tantrum, Holder responded with what I view as a tremendous amount of self control, pointing out that the tantrum was full of a “breathtaking” number of untrue statements.
The O’Reilly debate between Colmes and Crowley that followed was instructive. Crowley actually admitted that she didn’t see Holder being forced from office. (And she’s right. He won’t be.) Colmes made the points both that the Fast & Furious witch hunt is just that, and that the current scandal is intended as revenge for the Wilson/Plame scandal rather than being motivated by any real basis. O’Reilly still headlined his segment that Holder was being pushed to resign, which belied the point that the suggestion was coming from the usual GOP suspects that have been harrassing Holder since day one. As a special touch, O’Reilly tried to catch Colmes off guard by asking about the Marc Rich pardon of 2000 under Bill Clinton. Colmes wasn’t on his game fast enough to note that Scooter Libby was Rich’s lawyer for almost the wholee time.
Kevin Koster commented on Cavuto Interview Suggests GOP Wants Scott To Back Off Voter Purge
2012-06-13 14:28:16 -0400
· Flag
I hear you Joseph. But Romney is still in a pretty tough position.
If Romney stays all the way over to the right, the way he’s been hunkering down through much of the primary season, then he has no hope of picking up the independent or moderate votes. The whole model of all the undecided votes going to him doesn’t work if his positions only appeal to the people on the far right. And he knows he won’t be getting the Ron Paul contingent, as they’re either going to vote for Gary Johnson as a protest vote, or they’re not going to vote for the top of the ticket.
If Romney moves back toward the center to try to pick up the independents and moderates and a few of the undecideds, then he alienates the hard right GOP voters who haven’t trusted or liked him from the beginning. Those are the voters who regularly refused to support him to the tune of 75% for most of the primaries. Those are the voters who were split by the various candidates and wound up split between Santorum and Gingrich, who each thought they were going to pick up those voters and instead cancelled each other out. The Etch-a-Sketch comment is still smarting in those voters’ ears. If Romney pulls that move, then he loses a percentage of voters that could be larger than the independents he’d gain.
In the meantime, Obama will have the support of Dems, even if it’s reluctant on some parts. The farther over to the right Romney stays, the more independents and undecideds will either go with Obama, make a protest vote, or simply not vote. Much of this election is already decided. The party-line voters for Dems and GOP have already chosen. The voters up for grabs are the independents and moderates in the middle, who are more likely to swing to the center than the far right. But Romney can’t get those voters without sacrificing his base, who will not be pleased at that move.
Romney is aware of these numbers, which is why he’s working very hard not to say anything until the convention. This is a good strategy for him, and it should result in his numbers remaining steady up to then. It’s in September when he has to come out and say something about what policies he will pursue, and when he will have to debate Obama face to face. Romney’s campaigning history back to his Senate run in the 1990s indicates that unless he’s suddenly become a brand new person in the last three months, that will be an unfortunate time for him.
Now, if the economy suddenly nose-dives over the summer, then yes, Romney has a better chance. But that’s not likely. The more likely scenario is the economy continuing to stammer and stutter along, creating jobs but at the same anemic pace due to all the uncertainty, the businesses refusing to put their money into the economy, and the GOP refusing to approve any measures to make anything better before the election. Which means that Romney will only be able to say that Obama hasn’t improved the economy enough – an argument that falls flat right away.
Knowing this, the Fox News bunch is choosing to find every phantom scandal and distraction they can. The Supreme Court rulings this summer will be huge news for that reason. Anything they can smear the president with will be fair game to them – the same strategy they’ve been using for his entire presidency. And it’s a sign of their desperation. Since they don’t have an alternative, they can only trumpet the old slogans and throw rocks.
If Romney stays all the way over to the right, the way he’s been hunkering down through much of the primary season, then he has no hope of picking up the independent or moderate votes. The whole model of all the undecided votes going to him doesn’t work if his positions only appeal to the people on the far right. And he knows he won’t be getting the Ron Paul contingent, as they’re either going to vote for Gary Johnson as a protest vote, or they’re not going to vote for the top of the ticket.
If Romney moves back toward the center to try to pick up the independents and moderates and a few of the undecideds, then he alienates the hard right GOP voters who haven’t trusted or liked him from the beginning. Those are the voters who regularly refused to support him to the tune of 75% for most of the primaries. Those are the voters who were split by the various candidates and wound up split between Santorum and Gingrich, who each thought they were going to pick up those voters and instead cancelled each other out. The Etch-a-Sketch comment is still smarting in those voters’ ears. If Romney pulls that move, then he loses a percentage of voters that could be larger than the independents he’d gain.
In the meantime, Obama will have the support of Dems, even if it’s reluctant on some parts. The farther over to the right Romney stays, the more independents and undecideds will either go with Obama, make a protest vote, or simply not vote. Much of this election is already decided. The party-line voters for Dems and GOP have already chosen. The voters up for grabs are the independents and moderates in the middle, who are more likely to swing to the center than the far right. But Romney can’t get those voters without sacrificing his base, who will not be pleased at that move.
Romney is aware of these numbers, which is why he’s working very hard not to say anything until the convention. This is a good strategy for him, and it should result in his numbers remaining steady up to then. It’s in September when he has to come out and say something about what policies he will pursue, and when he will have to debate Obama face to face. Romney’s campaigning history back to his Senate run in the 1990s indicates that unless he’s suddenly become a brand new person in the last three months, that will be an unfortunate time for him.
Now, if the economy suddenly nose-dives over the summer, then yes, Romney has a better chance. But that’s not likely. The more likely scenario is the economy continuing to stammer and stutter along, creating jobs but at the same anemic pace due to all the uncertainty, the businesses refusing to put their money into the economy, and the GOP refusing to approve any measures to make anything better before the election. Which means that Romney will only be able to say that Obama hasn’t improved the economy enough – an argument that falls flat right away.
Knowing this, the Fox News bunch is choosing to find every phantom scandal and distraction they can. The Supreme Court rulings this summer will be huge news for that reason. Anything they can smear the president with will be fair game to them – the same strategy they’ve been using for his entire presidency. And it’s a sign of their desperation. Since they don’t have an alternative, they can only trumpet the old slogans and throw rocks.
Kevin Koster commented on O’Reilly Consults Glenn Beck For Insights Into Obama’s Outreach to African Americans
2012-06-13 05:02:16 -0400
· Flag
Beck has no credibility even on Fox anymore. I was shocked to see a radio company give him money to spew hatred, and even more shocked to see O’Reilly give him a platform to discuss his biased opinions about race. The one thing Beck should have been given is a long rest to think about the impact of his words and public proclamations. And then maybe an opportunity to apologize.
Kevin Koster commented on Hannity Turns To Coulter And Phony Dem Caddell To Blame Obama For National Security Leaks
2012-06-12 14:09:33 -0400
· Flag
Interesting thoughts, Bea.
You don’t think that SEAL Team 6 Members don’t face danger every day of their deployments? The President thanking a military team for their action is not only appropriate, but necessary. Had he not thanked them, the GOP and Fox News would have been even nastier toward him in terms of saying he was taking the credit that should have gone to that team.
We’ll see whether Donilon has to deal with any of this. You’re assuming that the Fox News assumptions are facts, and that’s an unfortunate road to go down.
As for the Valerie Plame matter, it was very much not a sham. It was an unintended consequence of the CIA’s overreaction to the books of John Stockwell and Philip Agee in the 1970s, where those guys named names and made public confessions of their activities in intelligence. Afterward, doing such a thing – leaking deliberately – was classified as a crime.
Flash forward to the GW Bush Admin, where the guys on top became very displeased with Joe Wilson publicly challenging their assertions. As punishment, they orchestrated a leak to multiple papers, deliberately exposing Plame, who was not publicly known to be a NOC. The result was that any work she was doing had to be stopped and her CIA career was effectively ended. That’s not to count the number of her associates whose lives were endangered because of this. The reason Armitage wasn’t prosecuted was because he wasn’t the one who obstructed the investigation. According to all sources, Armitage cooperated with Patrick Fitzgerald at every turn. Scooter Libby, on the other hand, committed perjury in an attempt to keep Fitzgerald from getting any higher in the food chain. Had Libby not lied, the trail was clearly headed toward Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. Libby was a good soldier, and has been rewarded with plenty of conservative support ever since he was essentially bailed out of jail by GW Bush on his way out of office.
The Plame matter was not the same thing as this one. The Plame matter was an issue of deliberately endangering people in retaliation for saying the wrong thing in public. The current matter is just a question of finding out who’s sharing too much information about operations – not about who’s trying to get a specific operative outed. And there is no indication of a motive here, whereas with the Bush Admin, there was a big and obvious one.
You don’t think that SEAL Team 6 Members don’t face danger every day of their deployments? The President thanking a military team for their action is not only appropriate, but necessary. Had he not thanked them, the GOP and Fox News would have been even nastier toward him in terms of saying he was taking the credit that should have gone to that team.
We’ll see whether Donilon has to deal with any of this. You’re assuming that the Fox News assumptions are facts, and that’s an unfortunate road to go down.
As for the Valerie Plame matter, it was very much not a sham. It was an unintended consequence of the CIA’s overreaction to the books of John Stockwell and Philip Agee in the 1970s, where those guys named names and made public confessions of their activities in intelligence. Afterward, doing such a thing – leaking deliberately – was classified as a crime.
Flash forward to the GW Bush Admin, where the guys on top became very displeased with Joe Wilson publicly challenging their assertions. As punishment, they orchestrated a leak to multiple papers, deliberately exposing Plame, who was not publicly known to be a NOC. The result was that any work she was doing had to be stopped and her CIA career was effectively ended. That’s not to count the number of her associates whose lives were endangered because of this. The reason Armitage wasn’t prosecuted was because he wasn’t the one who obstructed the investigation. According to all sources, Armitage cooperated with Patrick Fitzgerald at every turn. Scooter Libby, on the other hand, committed perjury in an attempt to keep Fitzgerald from getting any higher in the food chain. Had Libby not lied, the trail was clearly headed toward Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. Libby was a good soldier, and has been rewarded with plenty of conservative support ever since he was essentially bailed out of jail by GW Bush on his way out of office.
The Plame matter was not the same thing as this one. The Plame matter was an issue of deliberately endangering people in retaliation for saying the wrong thing in public. The current matter is just a question of finding out who’s sharing too much information about operations – not about who’s trying to get a specific operative outed. And there is no indication of a motive here, whereas with the Bush Admin, there was a big and obvious one.
Kevin Koster commented on Hannity: There Must Be A (Black) Radical In Obama Somewhere!
2012-06-08 14:21:05 -0400
· Flag
Kurtz is known for his book on President Obama “Radical in Chief”. He is very much a biased writer with an agenda to attack the current president. His new “evidence” consists of minutes from old New Party meetings where the Party guy writing things up insists that Obama joined their party while running for local office. Except that Obama was running as a Democrat, and that he was openly courting the endorsement of many people in Chicago, a lot of whom he had been working with as a community organizer. Not that hard to understand why the minutes would show something like this – Obama certainly met with them and was happy to have their endorsement, just as he was happy to have the endorsement of the business community. But it doesn’t mean that he actually joined their party and left the Democrat Party.
This is just another frantic attempt to smear Obama with stuff that was previously discussed four years ago. As though John McCain didn’t bring these ideas up in the public debates that he lost. (Nobody today seems to remember McCain trying to smear Obama with Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers references during a debate only to watch Obama easily bat them aside.)
The public heard all of this in 2008, and they elected Obama. This wasn’t a disputed election like 2000, where it was clear something reallly nasty had happened in Florida. This was a clear victory for Obama and a loss for the GOP on top of the beating they received in 2006. Clearly this has never sat well with the GOP. They have spent the last 3+ years doing anything they could to obstruct and hound this president with an almost unending stream of nonsense and personal attacks. For many of these people, their extreme personal dislike for this president has led them to hold a grudge that’s finding a new voice for this election.
(In fairness, there were plenty of people on the left who had an extreme personal dislike of GW Bush and his cronies, but the difference was that the Dems mostly rolled over and allowed Bush to do what he wanted, where the GOP has opposed everything done by Obama in lockstep.)
This is just another frantic attempt to smear Obama with stuff that was previously discussed four years ago. As though John McCain didn’t bring these ideas up in the public debates that he lost. (Nobody today seems to remember McCain trying to smear Obama with Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers references during a debate only to watch Obama easily bat them aside.)
The public heard all of this in 2008, and they elected Obama. This wasn’t a disputed election like 2000, where it was clear something reallly nasty had happened in Florida. This was a clear victory for Obama and a loss for the GOP on top of the beating they received in 2006. Clearly this has never sat well with the GOP. They have spent the last 3+ years doing anything they could to obstruct and hound this president with an almost unending stream of nonsense and personal attacks. For many of these people, their extreme personal dislike for this president has led them to hold a grudge that’s finding a new voice for this election.
(In fairness, there were plenty of people on the left who had an extreme personal dislike of GW Bush and his cronies, but the difference was that the Dems mostly rolled over and allowed Bush to do what he wanted, where the GOP has opposed everything done by Obama in lockstep.)
Kevin Koster commented on Sarah Palin: Wisconsin Recall Election Shows President Obama’s Goose Is Cooked
2012-06-08 05:54:01 -0400
· Flag
Lynn, do you not have a reasonable answer to any of the questions I posed to you? I must assume you are conceding all the points made. If that’s the case, I appreciate your openness of mind and your willingness to think about these things more deeply than whatever talking points are announced by Fox News.
Kevin Koster commented on Epic Debate Between Michelle Malkin And Sally Kohn On Hannity’s Radio Show
2012-06-08 05:52:02 -0400
· Flag
Michelle Malkin’s only means of “debate” is to act nasty and dismissive while trying to score cheap points. I wouldn’t call it good humor. It’s openly angry material. Not sure what put her into this state of mind, but one has to wonder what it’s like to live at that level of constant negativity.
Kevin Koster commented on Fox Promotes Obama As Great Destroyer Meme In Concert With Limbaugh
2012-06-07 15:03:37 -0400
· Flag
Interesting, Rick.
Divider – you mean the way that the GOP made a point of voting against anything he proposed and anything the Dems in Congress tried to pass, even if they had previously passed similar material?
Polarizer – you mean the way that Mitch McConnell publicly stated that his top priority was not to do anything about the economy but instead to try to keep Obama from being able to be reelected? Or maybe the way that Rush Limbaugh hatefully announced “I hope he fails!” at the beginning of the Obama presidency?
Insulter – you mean the way that GOP cranks have regularly made comments about the President somehow not being born here? Or how those same cranks have tried to say that the President is some kind of secret Muslim? Or how the same people have tried to keep the lie going that the President “went on an apology tour”?
The conduct of the GOP over the past three years will be judged harshly by history. It is a display of partisan obstinance that goes far beyond just having principled differences. This was deliberate obstruction with the stated goal of undermining anything the Obama Administration was doing. When GW Bush was president, the Dems in Congress actually gave him a lot of leeway, voting for his various policies much of the time and approving his appointments except in a very few extreme cases. They rolled over most of the time and let him and the GOP do the things they wanted to do. Contrast that with what the GOP has done since 2008, and you have a picture both of sore losers and of deep hatred.
This latest hate book about President Obama is just another wing of attack. It’s interesting that you have David Limbaugh painting him as a deliberate master of destruction, where a week ago, Hannity was enjoying Ed Klein’s attack book painting him as “The Amateur.” Hateful and Bitter much?
Divider – you mean the way that the GOP made a point of voting against anything he proposed and anything the Dems in Congress tried to pass, even if they had previously passed similar material?
Polarizer – you mean the way that Mitch McConnell publicly stated that his top priority was not to do anything about the economy but instead to try to keep Obama from being able to be reelected? Or maybe the way that Rush Limbaugh hatefully announced “I hope he fails!” at the beginning of the Obama presidency?
Insulter – you mean the way that GOP cranks have regularly made comments about the President somehow not being born here? Or how those same cranks have tried to say that the President is some kind of secret Muslim? Or how the same people have tried to keep the lie going that the President “went on an apology tour”?
The conduct of the GOP over the past three years will be judged harshly by history. It is a display of partisan obstinance that goes far beyond just having principled differences. This was deliberate obstruction with the stated goal of undermining anything the Obama Administration was doing. When GW Bush was president, the Dems in Congress actually gave him a lot of leeway, voting for his various policies much of the time and approving his appointments except in a very few extreme cases. They rolled over most of the time and let him and the GOP do the things they wanted to do. Contrast that with what the GOP has done since 2008, and you have a picture both of sore losers and of deep hatred.
This latest hate book about President Obama is just another wing of attack. It’s interesting that you have David Limbaugh painting him as a deliberate master of destruction, where a week ago, Hannity was enjoying Ed Klein’s attack book painting him as “The Amateur.” Hateful and Bitter much?
Kevin Koster commented on Jay Carney Smacks Down Ed Henry’s Gotcha Question About Venture Capitalism
2012-06-06 01:08:25 -0400
· Flag
Henry should have known better than to go for the obvious talking point. Jay Carney is smart enough to have prepared for that one with multiple answers, most of which he used, leaving Henry with very little to do but look embarassed.
Kevin Koster commented on Live Blogging Wisconsin Recall Election
2012-06-06 00:45:58 -0400
· Flag
Essentially, what happened here is threefold.
Walker’s supporters, most of whom were not Wisconsin voters, flooded his state with more than 3 times the amount of money that his opponents could raise. In short, they swamped the opposition.
Second, the opposition itself would have prevailed in this effort had the recall happened a year ago, when tempers were fresh after Walker’s behavior that triggered this whole mess. But after over a year of additional recalls coupled with a desire to do this in advance of the presidential election, the fatigue set in. As a result, all four of the GOP state senators were able to keep their jobs for now as well, meaning that they will continue to be able to do damage for another 2 years.
Finally, many people expressed their disappointment in the idea of having to deal with a recall of a politician over a disagreement rather than a criminal act. (This may apply in a minute if Walker is indicted, as is expected within the next few weeks.) Now, as I stated before, this belies the GOP’s glee over recalling Governor Gray Davis in California over policy differences, but one presumes that they’ve now turned over a new leaf. But as far as Wisconsin voters go, many simply weren’t willing to vote the man out over this mess. That does not mean that they will vote him back in when his term expires in 2 years.
That next campaign will not see him getting this kind of foxhole support from people around the nation. More likely, he will face a stronger opponent who has more time and a bigger support base to contest him. And the people who have tired of his behavior will take that opportunity to try a new idea.
Either way, Walker’s intentions toward a great national career have been dashed. He won’t be running for President any time soon, and after the inevitable defeat in 2 years, he’ll have to turn to Fox News or talk radio to keep his name in the public eye. What he thought was a very clever strategy to disembowel the unions in his state has instead enraged them against him and woken many people up to the real problems collective bargaining faces.
And we shouldn’t forget the polling showing that Obama continues to lead Romney in Wisconsin – and we haven’t had a single convention or debate yet. If Karl Rove is calling Wisconsin for Romney now, that’s more than premature – it’s practically in Dick Morris fantasyland. (The same fantasyland where Morris imagines Bill Clinton desperately wanting Obama defeated at the same time that the real Clinton is wittily destroying Romney and multiple GOP all-stars in front of crowds on the east coast…)
Walker’s supporters, most of whom were not Wisconsin voters, flooded his state with more than 3 times the amount of money that his opponents could raise. In short, they swamped the opposition.
Second, the opposition itself would have prevailed in this effort had the recall happened a year ago, when tempers were fresh after Walker’s behavior that triggered this whole mess. But after over a year of additional recalls coupled with a desire to do this in advance of the presidential election, the fatigue set in. As a result, all four of the GOP state senators were able to keep their jobs for now as well, meaning that they will continue to be able to do damage for another 2 years.
Finally, many people expressed their disappointment in the idea of having to deal with a recall of a politician over a disagreement rather than a criminal act. (This may apply in a minute if Walker is indicted, as is expected within the next few weeks.) Now, as I stated before, this belies the GOP’s glee over recalling Governor Gray Davis in California over policy differences, but one presumes that they’ve now turned over a new leaf. But as far as Wisconsin voters go, many simply weren’t willing to vote the man out over this mess. That does not mean that they will vote him back in when his term expires in 2 years.
That next campaign will not see him getting this kind of foxhole support from people around the nation. More likely, he will face a stronger opponent who has more time and a bigger support base to contest him. And the people who have tired of his behavior will take that opportunity to try a new idea.
Either way, Walker’s intentions toward a great national career have been dashed. He won’t be running for President any time soon, and after the inevitable defeat in 2 years, he’ll have to turn to Fox News or talk radio to keep his name in the public eye. What he thought was a very clever strategy to disembowel the unions in his state has instead enraged them against him and woken many people up to the real problems collective bargaining faces.
And we shouldn’t forget the polling showing that Obama continues to lead Romney in Wisconsin – and we haven’t had a single convention or debate yet. If Karl Rove is calling Wisconsin for Romney now, that’s more than premature – it’s practically in Dick Morris fantasyland. (The same fantasyland where Morris imagines Bill Clinton desperately wanting Obama defeated at the same time that the real Clinton is wittily destroying Romney and multiple GOP all-stars in front of crowds on the east coast…)