“At AOL one of our core values is that we act with integrity,” said Maureen Sullivan, an AOL spokeswoman who confirmed the decision. “We have monitored the unfolding events and have determined that Mr. Limbaugh’s comments are not in line with our values. As a result we have made the decision to suspend advertising on The Rush Limbaugh Radio show.” – Rush Limbaugh, AOL Part Ways
Limbaugh mugshot from 2006
Rush Limbaugh began his show today by explaining to his audience why he issued an apology on Saturday to Sandra Fluke. But not before he cracked wise about “Two if By Tea”, his own product, and whether he should pull his own advertising from his radio show.
“I’m sorry to see them go. They have done very well… ” – Rush Limbaugh on advertisers bailing from his radio show
From there, the first thirty minutes reiterated his apology to Sandra Fluke. He didn’t quote himself and cite what he had said about her, refusing to use the words “slut” and “prostitute” again.
What is missing, even with advertisers bailing, is that radio stations will not drop him. He remains the biggest ticket on talk radio, a medium dying out with newer generations, while new media takes over.
As self-serving ramblings go, Rush Limbaugh’s “apology” hit it out of the radio booth. It was 192 words, with the apology coming at around word 180. Considering Limbaugh’s the leader of the Republican pack, his predicament perfectly paints their problems this year.
“[House Speaker John] Boehner comes out and says Rush’s language was inappropriate. Using the salad fork for your entrée, that’s inappropriate. Not this stuff,” Will said. “And it was depressing because what it indicates is that the Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh. They want to bomb Iran, but they’re afraid of Rush Limbaugh.” – ABC News
It mimics the Chris Matthews model, which he had to unload during the 2008 season, which I cite in my book, when Matthews led the cable yakker smears against Hillary: it starts with talking about yourself and the tough daily grind of how difficult it is to keep what you really think in check.
If these guys weren’t hopelessly backward in their thinking toward women it wouldn’t be so difficult.
Rush Limbaugh has given Media Matters and others reason to ramp up the efforts to cause him public pain, even if his financial model is solidly built to last as long as Limbaugh deigns.
However, even after his outlandish behavior over the years, going well back into the ’90s when he accused the Clintons of everything, including murder, the moment hit a collective nerve in this country.
Limbaugh’s “slut” belch met a moment that already had galvanized women. From Susan G. Komen’s right-wing attack on Planned Parenthood, Bob McDonnell’s transvaginal probe catastrophe, and the contraceptive issue collision that was led by males Bill O’Reilly, who also took Limbaugh’s side, E.J. Dionne, Mark Shields, Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews, women reacted.
It’s been a very bad week for Rush Limbaugh, the worst since he got his mugshot taken and was facing a possible indictment over drug charges, way back in 2006.
“I wish I had that particular line back,” Santorum said Tuesday on Laura Ingraham’s radio show. – The Hill
People who are ready and equipped for the national spotlight, but also understand America, not just their besotted base, know intuitively what things crossing their mind should not be uttered.
Rick Santorum saying reading John F. Kennedy’s speech on religion made him want to “throw up” was again criticized today by Rush Limbaugh, following criticism by Newt Gingrich.
But the reason Santorum wants the line back is because it’s forever bracketed him as what he is: an extremist religious conservative who disrespects the secular traditions of presidential power and someone Americans cannot trust to keep those traditions in place.
There isn’t much of a “left,” let alone a “secular left.” However, it does give you a idea of how irrelevant Rick Santorum has made Newt Gingrich.
Gingrich’s rallying cry is the last refuge of very desperate Republicans. To slither behind a pulpit, declare you’ve “fallen short of the glory of God,” then ramble on and on about how the “secular left” is a threat.
Newt Gingrich warned members of a Georgia church Sunday that the “secular left” is trying to undermine American principles established by the Founding Fathers as he sought to rejuvenate his presidential bid.
The former House speaker is bypassing Tuesday’s Republican presidential primaries in Michigan and Arizona and spending most of the week in Georgia, which he represented in Congress for 20 years. Gingrich said at a church north of Atlanta that Americans have faced a “50-year assault” by those trying to alienate people of faith.
Including John F. Kennedy in the “50-year assault” is rather humorous; the man who was seen as so close to the Pope he had to give a speech to prove he was not. That 50 years later Rick Santorum is admitting when he read the speech it made him want to throw up isn’t surprising.
What Kennedy proclaimed in his speech on religion wouldn’t happen today by either Democratic or Republican candidates for fear of what it would mean to “key demographics” as they’re now euphemistically called.
If the “secular left” weren’t always under threat itself and usually by the Democratic Party, whose members contort themselves while never making the case that secular government policy serves all the people without regard to faith, its charter mission, that would be one thing. But when was the last time you ever heard a Democrat stand up for secularism?
We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief. – Ronald Reagan, 26 October 1984
If John F. Kennedy had said what Rick Santorum said, highlighted on “This Week”, Kennedy wouldn’t have been elected president.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You have also spoken out about the issue of religion in politics, and early in the campaign, you talked about John F. Kennedy’s famous speech to the Baptist ministers in Houston back in 1960. Here is what you had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SANTORUM: Earlier (ph) in my political career, I had the opportunity to read the speech, and I almost threw up. You should read the speech.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHANOPOULOS: That speech has been read, as you know, by millions of Americans. Its themes were echoed in part by Mitt Romney in the last campaign. Why did it make you throw up?
SANTORUM: Because the first line, first substantive line in the speech says, “I believe in America where the separation of church and state is absolute.” I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.
First question is, who’s going to define “the church”?
As we found out recently, the Catholic Church and other conservative religious Americans, including Democrats, don’t believe the First Amendment protects individuals equally as it does “the church.”
That’s a very negative modern day development for free-thinking individuals.
It gives you an idea of just how far right we’ve gone since 1960.
But even as Reagan spoke the words he did above, it was Ronald Reagan himself who emboldened religious conservatives after what they saw as defeats in Griswold and Roe v. Wade, which is why Rep. Henry Hyde struck back with the Hyde Amendment before the Reagan era.
Democrats have contorted themselves to try to prove their righteous worth, as seen by religious conservative standards, which Pres. Obama validated when he codified the Hyde Amendment into the Affordability Care Act. Before Obama, it had simply been part of the budget, voted on yearly; with help from Speaker Pelosi, Democrats changed that.
When the political self-loathing class of Democrats comes up against attacks by self-righteousness Republicans, that’s when we get wild statements by elite cable yakkers like Joe Scarborough, because no one ever holds them accountable. It’s nothing to suggest, as Scarborough did, that mandating female deacons in the Southern Baptist church is the equivalent of Obama’s contraceptive mandate, because as Santorum, Gingrich and Romney have all charged, Obama is attacking religious freedom itself. The implication and framing of the argument against Obama’s policy is what’s important, right? Why argue the facts and the false statements being used to tip the truth on its head?
In fact, Pres. Obama is upholding religious freedom, not government intervention as Scarborough falsely claimed, but as Reagan himself said, as did John F. Kennedy, that no American is required to choose any religion and I would add, be second to the interests of any.
It’s fitting religious conservatives would miss the beauty of the First Amendment swinging both ways.
Rick Santorum is the embodiment of George W. Bush’s calamitous “crusade” language made manifest in political flesh. He is the polar opposite of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and any number of the other French loving American founders.
[...] By our own act of assembly of 1705, c. 30, if a person brought up in the Christian religion denies the being of a God, or the Trinity, or asserts there are more gods than one, or denies the Christian religion to be true, or the scriptures to be of divine authority, he is punishable on the first offence by incapacity to hold any office or employment ecclesiastic al, civil, or military; on the second by disability to sue, to take any gift or legacy, to be guardian, executor, or administrator, and by three years’ imprisonment without bail. A father’s right to the custody of his own children being founded in law on his right of guardianship, this being taken away, they may of course be severed from him, and put by the authority of a court into more orthodox hands. This is a summary view of that religious slavery under which a people have been willing to remain, who have lavished their lives and fortunes for the establishment of their civil freedom. The error(1) seems not sufficiently eradicated, that the operations of the mind, as well as the acts of the body, are subject to the coercion of the laws. But our rulers can have no authority over such natural rights, only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If it be said, his testimony in a court of justice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him. Constraint may make him worse. by making him a hypocrite, but it will never make him a truer man. It may fix him obstinately in his errors, but will not cure them. Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error. Give a loose to them, they will support the true religion by bringing every false one to their tribunal, to the test of their investigation. They are the natural enemies of error, and of error only. Had not the Roman government permitted free inquiry, Christianity could never have been introduced. Had not free inquiry been indulged at the era of the Reformation, the corruptions of
Christianity could not have been purged away. If it be restrained now, the, present corruptions will be protected, and new ones encouraged . Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potato as an article of food. Government is just as infallible, too, when it fixes systems in physics. Galileo was sent to the Inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere; the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error, however, at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared it was whirled round its axis by a vortex. The government in which he lived was wise enough to see that this was no question of civil jurisdiction, or we should all have been involved by authority in vortices. In fact, the vortices have been exploded, and the Newtonian principle of gravitation is now more firmly established, on the basis of reason, than it would be were the government to step in, and to make it an article of necessary faith. Reason and experiment have been indulged, and error has fled before them. It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors? Fallible men; men governed by bad passions, by private as well as public reasons. And why subject it to coercion? To produce uniformity. But is uniformity of opinion desirable? No more than of face and stature. [...]
Secy. Clinton’s statement on Syria from Friday is unequivocal. “The entire world, other than Russia and China, were willing to recognize we must take international action against the Syrian regime,” Clinton said. She went further, calling the action of China and Russia “despicable.” Then asked “Whose side are they on?” Clinton saying neither were on the side of the Syrian people.
Juan Cole writes about Hamas dispersing their interests away from Syria, their long-time patron.
Today, Mitt Romney on Fox News Sunday was asked about Pres. Obama’s apology for the inadvertent burning of Qurans at Bagram airbase, which reportedly had extremist messages inside. Romney asserted “this just sticks in their throat.” Wallace continued the mantra that “winning in Afghanistan” is even possible, whatever that definition means. Romney taking issue with Pres. Obama announce a date to draw down forces, inserting illogical neoconservatism in the place of assessing reality.
When it comes to foreign policy, minus Ron Paul, all of the Republican candidates are 20th century relics when it comes to envisioning America’s role in the world today.
Two American officers were shot dead inside the Interior Ministry building here on Saturday, and NATO responded by immediately pulling all its advisers out of Afghan ministries in Kabul, in a deepening of the crisis over the American military’s burning of Korans at a NATO military base.
The order by the NATO commander, Gen. John R. Allen, came on the fifth day of virulent anti-American demonstrations across the country, and it was a clear sign of concern that the fury had reached deeply into even the Afghan security forces and ministries working most closely with the coalition.
The worst possible thing to do is go to war with Iran. The key is the people — and they are sick of the mullahs. Right now the pressure is working to separate the people from the regime. A limited strike would undercut all that.
[...] There is no doubt [that there is a huge divergence between U.S. interests and those of Israel]. We want to stop Israel from attacking so the issue is how to persuade Israel that we are serious about stopping Iran from having a weapon — like a congressional finding that we will take all steps necessary to stop Iran. It means we will define red lines that can’t be crossed.
But the bottom line is, I don’t know a single person in government, civilian or in uniform, who thinks it is in our national interest to go to war with Iran now.
Kiss of death? Rick Santorum gets a glowing tribute by Michael Ledeen in the Wall Street Journal over Santorum’s stance on Iran.
The Red Cross has reached the city of Homs. Juan Cole retweeted the link for the video above, as “Friends of Syria” try to maneuver a way through this cricis, which will not be easy.
A CBS News report on what’s happening in Syria is even worse, including a map of documented torture.
Homs — which is mostly Sunni — was an early flashpoint of dissent against Assad’s regime, which is led by the minority Alawite community, which has Shiite power Iran as its main patron.
In April, protesters gathered at the central Clock Square in Homs, bringing mattresses, food and water in hopes of emulating Cairo’s Tahrir Square during the Egyptian revolution. Homs had a reputation for tolerance between Syria’s religions and Muslim sects, said Mohammad Saleh, an opposition figure who fled the city, but Sunnis have increasingly felt pushed into an underclass status by Assad.
A Western intelligence official said the Syrian military has the ability to “level Homs if it wanted to.” But the risks of backlash from Syria’s majority Sunnis — including many military officers — is far too great, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity under briefing rules.
[...] White House spokesman Jay Carney said the Obama administration still opposes military intervention but “obviously we’ll have to evaluate this as time goes on.”
In Geneva, a panel of U.N. human rights experts said the United Nations has a secret list of top Syrian officials who could face investigation for crimes against humanity. The U.N. experts indicated that the list goes as high as Assad.
Experts said the list appears mostly part of international pressures on Syria rather than a direct threat. Syria isn’t a member of the International Criminal Court so is outside its jurisdiction. Russia also would likely block any moves in the U.N. Security Council to refer the country to the Hague-based tribunal.
What we are reading about and seeing through the little news getting out of Syria is genocide. It is also far worse than what happened in Libya.
Speaking with Andrea Mitchell today, former SecDef William Cohen speculated about a “coalition of the willing” mounting a force against Assad, but was correct to emphasize the Arab nations must take the lead. With United Nations Security Council paralyzed, in order to save the Syrian people, the Arab League must step up, but let’s not kid ourselves that the U.S. won’t have an important role.
But in fact, Santorum has grown more popular among women while talking about his opposition to abortion, his disapproval of birth control and his view that the federal government shouldn’t pay for prenatal screenings. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows not only that Santorum is doing better among GOP women than he was a few weeks ago, but also that he is less unpopular — and also less well known — among Democratic and independent women than his Republican rivals Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.
Voters and political strategists alike say Santorum’s rise has less to do with his views on these issues than on his ability to relate to the daily struggles of the middle class.
Rick Santorum’s plus is that he’s honest about his extreme views, with his “I’m a guy from a steel town” economic patter sounding far more fair than the other GOP primary candidates. But come on, that’s not very hard to do.
Women detest Newt Gingrich, with Mitt Romney wholly untrustworthy at this point, after being eviscerated by his opponents, with the scrutiny of Mr. Romney’s changing positions devastating to his brand. However, it’s Romney’s impossibly inauthentic persona that hurts him most when compared to Rick Santorum.
However, nobody has even begun chipping away at Rick Santorum’s views, what he’s said and how hostile he is to modern women, but also the plight of women of new generations. But will Rick Santorum ever be as disliked by women as Newt Gingrich? Not a chance, however, he’ll be very scary when his social views are stripped down to 30-second ads.
Santorum’s real problem, as we saw in the debate this week, is that when he gets the spotlight he withers.
In a general election, Rick Santorum would need Gen. David Petraeus to fend off a 50-state shellacking, but he’s pretty busy over at the C.I.A.
This is a prime example of why polling is a snap shot, but not a predictor of what will eventually develop. Most Republicans would vote for the GOP candidate in November over Obama, no matter who he is. However, suburban Republican women will be very skeptical once team Obama starts using Santorum’s words against him in 30-second ads, with Independents running for the hills or not voting at all.
Two U.S. troops have been shot to death and four more wounded by an Afghan solider who turned his gun on his allies in apparent anger over the burning of Korans at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan, an Afghan official tells CBS News.
A statement from the International Security Assistance Force – Afghanistan, the international coalition in the country, confirmed that two troops were killed in Eastern Afghanistan on Thursday by “an individual wearing an Afghan National Army uniform.”
ISAF does not typically give the nationality of casualties until family members have been notified, but the CBS News source in the Afghan government said those killed and injured in the attack in the eastern Ningarhar province, along the border with Pakistan, were Americans.
Conant told BuzzFeed that Rubio never requested to have his name removed from the LDS Church’s records, which means officially, the church is likely still counting him as a member. [...] An overworked bartender at Sam’s Town Hotel and Casino, Mario had little use for a religion that promoted a strict code of moral conduct that seemed at odds with the way he made a living, said Michelle. “He liked to smoke and drink,” she laughed. …. – Exclusive: Marco Rubio’s Mormon Roots, via BuzzFeed
Marco Rubio as Romney's Veep Now In Question?
Few could have imagined seeing Marco Rubio and Mormon trending on Twitter today, but that’s what’s happened after Ben Smith’s BuzzFeed broke a blockbuster story on Marco Rubio being baptized as a member of the Church of Latter Day Saints. It’s been confirmed by family members and has send Rubio’s people into a tailspin.
I can’t quite picture Marco Rubio mimicking The Osmonds, but that’s just one nugget in the story being devoured across the political spectrum today.
Now everyone’s pondering whether Marco Rubio’s childhood Mormonism is a vice presidential deal breaker. It’s the sub-heading on the BuzzFeed story. But Rubio already said he didn’t want to be vice president, right?
My husband Mark is a recovering Mormon, as many of you already know. He went through the effort to have his name removed from the LDS Church’s records, which is no quick task. That Mr. Rubio has chosen not to do this, while adopting Catholicism as his religion today, means his status as a Catholic isn’t quite clear where the LDS church is concerned. But at least he won’t have to endure being baptized after he dies. End. Snark.
From Buzzfeed:
Rubio spokesman Alex Conant confirmed the story to BuzzFeed, and said Rubio returned to the Catholic church a few years later with his family, receiving his first communion on Christmas day in 1984 at the age of 13.
The revelation adds a new dimension to Rubio’s already-nuanced religious history—and could complicate his political future at a time when many Republicans see him as the odds-on favorite for the 2012 vice presidential nod. Vice presidential candidates are traditionally chosen to provide ethnic and religious balance to a ticket. Mitt Romney’s Mormonism and Rubio’s Catholic faith would already mean the first two members of minority traditions on a Republican ticket in American history. Rubio’s Mormon roots could further complicate that calculation.
A sign that Rubio’s aides see the story as potentially damaging: BuzzFeed’s inquiries appear to have sent them into frantic damage-control mode, and after email inquiries from BuzzFeed — but minutes before Conant responded with a phone call this morning — a brief item appeared on the blog of the Miami Herald mentioning the Senator’s religous past.
I’ve read a lot about Marco Rubio since he was jettisoned into the national spotlight. The fact about his Mormon childhood is just the latest in a convoluted biography that has been a marketing creation from the moment he decided to break into politics. Rubio’s eye locked on the presidency and becoming the first Hispanic occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, which in a country where Latino votes matter is a serious ambition for anyone of his obvious talents.
U.S. Gen. John Allen, the top commander of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said after the books had been mistakenly given to troops to be burned at a garbage pit without realizing it. “It was not a decision that was made because they were religious materials,” Allen said Tuesday, one day after Afghan workers at the garbage pit found the books. “It was not a decision that was made with respect to the faith of Islam. It was a mistake. It was an error. The moment we found out about it we immediately stopped and we intervened.” – CBS News
The Qurans were removed from a library in the Parwan Detention Facility and unintentionally burned at Bagram Air Field. According to reports from a military official, they contained extremist messages, though what that means no one has specified yet, an investigation pending.
Jay Carney said it was a “deeply unfortunate incident,” with an official apology offered to the Afghan people from the U.S. military yesterday.
Violent protests left at least five dead and others wounded Wednesday as demonstrations over Quran burning intensified in Afghanistan. Police killed four people and wounded 10 others during protests in Parwan province, said Abdul Wassi Sayedkhili, a provincial council official. Health officials said a fifth person died and 10 others wounded in eastern Nangarhar province.
Religious conservatives are underestimating what signing Virginia’s state rape legislation will mean for the career and ambitions of Gov. Bob McDonnell. Perhaps one of the saner Republicans who actually wants to win a national election gave McDonnell a call.
Until this weekend, McDonnell (R) and his aides had said the governor would sign the measure if it made it to his desk. McDonnell, who strongly opposes abortion, will no longer make that commitment.
…Republicans at the Capitol, however, remain optimistic that McDonnell will sign the measure.
“The governor is strongly pro-life, and I think he would hold consistent in his support for this bill,” said Del. Ben L. Cline (R-Rockbridge), co-chairman of the Conservative Caucus.
[...] Victoria Cobb, president of the conservative Family Foundation, which considers the ultrasound bill one of its top priorities, said Tuesday that she and her staff were trying to determine what they need to do to persuade the governor to sign the legislation.
“It is a change as far as I can tell,” she said of McDonnell’s shift.
They’re now looking for a “compromise,” though how you can compromise on state rape, I’m dying to know.
You can’t get elected without women and if Bob McDonnell signs Virginia’s state rape legislation he’ll be in a class of men who’ll make history’s laughing stock list, when the modern era chapter on women’s freedoms is written.
UPDATE: Gov. Bob McDonnell has felt the heat and backs away from the Virginia Republicans’ state rape bill, via Burns and Haberman:
I am pro-life. I believe deeply in the sanctity of innocent human life and believe governments have a duty to protect human life. The more our society embraces a culture of life for all people, the better country we will have. Over the course of my 20-year career in elected office, I have been glad to play a leading role in putting in place common-sense policies that protect and defend innocent human life in the Commonwealth. One of those bills was Virginia’s informed consent statute, of which I was the chief patron in the House of Delegates, finally seeing its passage in 2001. This session, the General Assembly is now considering amending this informed consent statute to include a requirement that any woman seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound in order to establish the gestational age for appropriate medical purposes, and to offer a woman the opportunity to voluntarily review that ultrasound prior to giving her legal informed consent to abortion.
Over the past days I have discussed the specific language of the proposed legislation with other governors, physicians, attorneys, legislators, advocacy groups, and citizens. It is apparent that several amendments to the proposed legislation are needed to address various medical and legal issues which have arisen. It is clear that in the majority of cases, a routine external, transabdominal ultrasound is sufficient to meet the bills stated purpose, that is, to determine gestational age. I have come to understand that the medical practice and standard of care currently guide physicians to use other procedures to find the gestational age of the child, when abdominal ultrasounds cannot do so. Determining gestational age is essential for legal reasons, to know the trimester of the pregnancy in order to comply with the law, and for medical reasons as well.
Thus, having looked at the current proposal, I believe there is no need to direct by statute that further invasive ultrasound procedures be done. Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state. No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure.
For this reason, I have recommended to the General Assembly a series of amendments to this bill. I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily. I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision.
I have requested other amendments that help clarify the purposes of the bill and reflect a better understanding of prevailing medical practices. It is my hope that the members of the General Assembly will act favorably upon these recommendations from our office. We will await their action prior to making any further comments on this matter.
“One of the mandates is they require free prenatal testing in every insurance policy in America,” Santorum, a conservative Roman Catholic, told a Christian Alliance luncheon in Columbus. “Why? Because it saves money in health care. Why? Because free prenatal testing ends up in more abortions and therefore less care that has to be done, because we cull the ranks of the disabled in our society.” He added that the requirement was “another hidden message as to what President Obama thinks of those who are less able.”
Rush Limbaugh talked about Rick Santorum’s culture scream today, but he did so in conjunction with Whitney Houston’s wake, parts of which he claimed to have watched intently.
Limbaugh warned that Santorum’s opponents are going to try to make people afraid of Rick Santorum and his candidacy with charges he’s bent toward a theocracy. The segue to Houston’s funeral was ham-fisted, as Limbaugh lauded the “stark contrast”, as he saw it, between what was said at Houston’s funeral, compared to the “what we get in the public square every day.”
“They want people to fear exactly what happened in that church service.” – Rush Limbaugh
It should be remembered that Limbaugh’s church is an 18-hole golf course.
But the irony of hearing him regurgitate talking points of religious Christians, while citing Whitney Houston’s funeral as an example of what Democrats are supposedly against, was straight out of Karl Rove’s culture war playbook of 2004.
It proves how far conservatism has fallen today. There is nothing conservative about Rick Santorum’s candidacy or Rush Limbaugh trying to make the case for him. Republicans today think the First Amendment only protects religious institutions (see Joe Scarborough), putting the individual woman subservient to them. There isn’t anything conservative about that.
“He wants to control people’s social lives. At the same time, he voted for Planned Parenthood. I mean, I don’t see how anybody can get away with that inconsistency pretending he’s a conservative. And his voting record is, I think from my viewpoint, an atrocious voting record, how liberal he’s been and all the things he’s voted for over his many years in the Senate and in the House.”
Ironically, Lawless noted, all the attention to contraception at the moment may end up boosting the overall public standing of the 2010 health care law. Free preventive health care, whether it’s a cancer screening or the pill, may well become as popular as provisions like allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ health plans until age 26. – 2012: The year of ‘birth control moms’?
Religious conservatives, their right-wing supporters and their Republican allies have finally overstepped and what played out last week was proof. The Susan G. Komen catastrophe, starring right-wing ideologue Karen Handel, now seems like foreshadowing.
The Tea Party was the germination, which inspired the Koch Bros, Dick Armey and an explosion of political opportunists, beginning with Rush, Sean and the wingnut radio bunch, leaching on to the energy. Well-funded and stoked on anger, Republicans harnessed that energy, but couldn’t control it, including in Congress.
Because of the 2010 political malpractice by the Democratic Party, state legislatures turned Republican in record numbers, unleashing a wave of anti-women’s freedom campaigns that culminated most recently in Virginia.
Representing a crescendo of events over months that turned into years, in walks Pres. Obama with his free contraceptive mandate and we were off to the First Amendment races, which has tripped up every religious conservative, no matter the party, and right-wing Republicans, as well as moderately perceived advocates, in droves.
The Catholic Church is telling women we shouldn’t use birth control.
Republicans like Joe Scarborough and religious conservatives, represented so well by Rick Santorum, who is now caterwauling about Obama’s policies aren’t based on the Bible, are entitled to their own ideological beliefs and opinions. They are not entitled to their own facts. If Mika Brzezinski’s opinion was valued equally to Scarborough’s the discussion might have ended differently.
Pres. Obama can be called a “secret Muslim,” be forced to give a speech on race and religion, but Mitt Romney’s Mormonism can’t be discussed and his spokesperson gets away with stonewalling the press on a subject Romney himself opened up, baptismal of the dead, euphemistically called “proxy baptism”.
Most of those who have been successfully bullied out of their free speech rights are reluctant to talk about what happened for fear of further retribution. But now, VanderSloot may have picked the wrong person to bully.
Jody May-Chang is an independent journalist and an LGBT spokesperson in Boise. By coincidence, she was one of the local reporters who interviewed me last weekend when I spoke to the annual Bill of Rights dinner of the ACLU in Idaho. At the end of the interview, she mentioned to me the series of threats issued to local LGBT journalists and bloggers by VanderSloot. Unbeknownst to May-Chang at the time, she, too, had been targeted for the crime of speaking critically of the Idaho CEO.
What are we saying if we let the traditional media and cable news-tainment show hosts purposefully ignore important facts even when challenged? Or we refuse to question religious institutions and individuals who are flexing their power across the political spectrum in ways that make Jerry Falwell’s dreams seem modest?
If we’re not going to ask questions after a politician says something that would lead any curious person to probe further, then what’s the point of the modern day religious test?
If we don’t want specifics and an honest conversation about religion, are we saying we don’t care what your religion is as long as you believe in God?
Nothing impacts public policy across this country where women are concerned greater than the interference of religious institutions in public policy matters. We’ve also found that religious institutions have taken for granted the ignorance of politicians and the public. Through the exercise of watching the shock when women like myself and many others challenge them that the First Amendment swings both ways, we’ve found religious conservatives, our cable talking heads and the media don’t think that’s important.
Religious conservatism also interferes with our diplomacy, the use of soft power and the focus on women’s roles, which Secy. Clinton has brought to the forefront through women’s empowerment being at the heart of stabilizing developing nations. As I’ve written innumerable times, it’s another aspect of the Hillary Effect.
But as long as we’re cherry-picking religious questions, is a Jewish president out because he’s not a Christian or because of the offensive notion of possible duel loyalties?
All we need to know is the person is god-fearing, right?
Oh, and not a Muslim.
Sean Hannity still brings up Jeremiah Wright when talking about Barack Obama. Following right-wing radio talking points, Rick Santorum did it this week.
Rick Santorum’s bag man thinks it’s funny to play Old Coot and say women are just too emotional about birth control. Take an aspirin, honey, preferably between your knees.
Everyone’s faith is a little bit kooky to an unbeliever. Watch Bill Maher’s “Religulous”, now available online free to see, and you’ll be challenged. I’m sure many people would find my meditation, backed by an Episcopalian and Christian foundation, not only non-traditional but blasphemous for the way I see Jesus Christ after a lifetime of contemplation.
It’s pretty clear after the latest argument on contraception that we could not do any worse with an atheist in the Oval Office.
That won’t happen in America, because religious conservatives and the institutions that back them control the political and legislative processes, as well as the politicians who win elections and the media who reports on it all.
That’s the system Pres. Obama and his administration challenged with the contraceptive mandate, which is no doubt bolstered by polling proving the majority of women in this country stand behind him.
Religious conservatives and their allies in the media and news-tainment shows know they’ve lost the biggest battle of all due to a constitutional carve-out that was as ingenious to create as it was to proffer. It’s clear they don’t intend to go down quietly.
Politico’s Maggie Haberman asks the question I’ve been answering for weeks, which also shines klieg lights on Mitt Romney’s problem: Will women vote for Rick Santorum? Of course they won’t, which is just one reason Romney is the only choice for Republicans, but he’s locked in a wingnut death match that will take the whole party down before Pres. Obama gets to land a punch.
Mitt Romney used to think women had a right to control our own bodies, but he wants to be president so badly he’s willing to sell the majority of the voting public, women, out. With rumors floating he’s also ready to pick Transvaginal Probe Bob McDonnell as his vice president, Romney looks ready to walk down Santorum’s dead end road.
The Mitt Romney of today is putting on a “severe conservative” act and it’s costing him, as well it should.
Who is Mitt Romney trying to fool?
Why is Mitt Romney willing to keep quiet about something so fundamental to making him who he is?
Candidate Barack Obama had to come out and give a speech after the media got wind of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s fire-breathing.
What person ducks talking about things that are fundamental to their life?
Mitt Romney won’t talk about health care, because he won’t get the nomination if he does.
Mitt Romney won’t talk about his Mormon faith, because he doesn’t want to make religious conservatives nervous.
Rick Santorum’s religiosity is not the issue. It’s that Rick Santorum will make his belief mine if he’s elected presi—- I just can’t finish that sentence. It’s ridiculous.
But at least Rick Santorum is who he appears to be.
Mitt Romney has decided that people are afraid of who he is so he’s forced to opine lovingly about trees and cars in a state where his dad was once governor.
Somebody set this man free to go to the left of Rick Santorum.
With the amount of money he’s spending and the money it’s going to take to buy the nomination, Mitt Romney could self-finance as an independent candidate. An Independent who believes in birth control, gay rights, and is a can-do turnaround man whose perfectly willing to bomb Iran.
That guy might have a chance.
But not unless he comes out of the closet about believing in gov. subsidized health care and gives an interview on “60 Minutes” on how important faith is in his life, his Mormon faith. Open up about the experiences it has offered, while simultaneously saying what’s done in temple is sacred. Make that case.
Because I’m not frightened by a man like Rick Santorum who is what he is, doesn’t pull punches, and is willing to be laughed at and humiliated in a general election that will end ugly for him and the Republican Party.
But I’m terrified of the man who has enough money to buy the nomination. A man willing to hide his very foundation and his philosophy in order to conform to what religious conservatives and the right-wing talk radio audience want. A man who has connections to Wall Street that can form an alliance squeezing out the 99%. A man who has decided women have one role and it’s not leading men.
That man is potentially dangerous.
It seems like the Republican base senses this too, though they’re clearly not worried about misogyny.
Mitt Romney isn’t struggling to win the nomination because of his Mormonism or Romneycare. He’s getting the cold shoulder because Republican primary voters can sense he’s hiding something and they’re just not sure what it is, but they know he’s pretending to be something he’s not.
That’s because Mr. Romney is doing just that. He’s a man who believes in government subsidized health care, which is smart. He’s also a man whose faith beliefs are the foundation of his life and no Republican primary voter trusts a person who won’t talk about that. To get the Republican nomination Romney’s been willing to hide, contort, reject all the ideas that make him Mitt Romney.
Rick Santorum is surging because he won’t.
It makes a stark contrast and a clear choice and right now that choice isn’t trending Mitt Romney’s way.
NGO’s have rarely, if ever, been targeted this way and have been operating in Egypt and around the world for years.
Egypt sets trial date for pro-democracy workers – The trial of 43 people charged with unlawfully conducting pro-democracy work will begin Feb. 26, state media reported Saturday, in the latest sign that the Egyptian government is disinclined to heed Washington’s warning that failure to drop the matter could lead to a cut off of U.S. aid.
The announcement of a trial date for the defendants, including at least 16 Americans, came as the state-run newspaper, al-Ahram, published several stories that portrayed the work of the non-government organizations as underhanded and a threat to Egypt’s sovereignty.
The al-Ahram report goes on to say that Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, already requested to transport the 7 indicted Americans with him as he departed Cairo recently, with Secy. LaHood’s son one of those being detained. Egyptian officials decline the request.
White House and State Dept. hadn’t released statements at the time of this post.
As an aside, I have always marveled at Egyptian men turning away from the heritage seen in their ancient erotic art, drawings and relics. The earliest erotica can be traced back to ancient Egypt. Any time you see a watering can or vessel in mural or any other Egyptian art, pay close attention to the details, which very likely will lead you to a corporeal setting.
It’s hard to think of this latest development of the Egyptian revolution that ousted Mubarak without thinking of Secy. Clinton’s first words. She came out first to say the Mubarak regime was “stable,” quickly having to eat those words. Can there be any doubt that knowing the Middle East as she does what Clinton was envisioning were circumstances the U.S. could no longer control through our “friend”.
If you believe in freedom you’ve got to also understand that societies kept in bondage for a century are going to unleash fury once freed. That goes double for Egypt, which is the beating heart of where Sayyid Qutb, the godfather of Al Qaeda and leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood back in the ’50s and 1960s, lived.
After picking herself up off the floor, “Excuse me, I’m just trying to catch my breath from that, Mr. Friess,” was all Andrea Mitchell could muster.
The one thing you don’t want to do as a Super PAC backer is make news that compounds your candidate’s negatives on a subject, but also could give his struggling opponent a weapon.
I get such a chuckle when these things come out. Here we have millions of our fellow americans unemployed, we have jihadist camps being set up in Latin America, which rick has been warning about, and people seem to be so preoccupied with sex. I think that says something about our culture. We maybe need a massive therapy session so we can concentrate on what the real issues are. And this contraceptive thing, my gosh, it’s such inexpensive. Back in my days, they used bayer aspirin for contraceptives. The gals put it between their knees and it wasn’t that costly.”
Mitchell was at the center of the Susan G. Komen scandal and it looks like the Grande Dame of NBC has done it again.
It’s the most delicious gaffe of the 2012 Republican circus yet.
When asked by Newsweek if he has done baptisms for the dead—in which Mormons find the names of dead people of all faiths and baptize them, as an LDS representative says, to “open the door” to the highest heaven—he looked slightly startled and answered, “I have in my life, but I haven’t recently.” – The Daily Beast (an interview from 2008)
So, we find out that Mitt Romney has participated in the baptismal of the dead. But he hasn’t “recently”?
This is a serious question any presidential candidate would have to answer. Barack Obama has been asked questions about his religion relentlessly, called a Muslim. Mr. Romney deserves no special treatment on the subject.
I’ve called Mitt Romney’s Boston headquarters, but all you get is an answering machine where you can leave a message.
I’ve tweeted Kevin Madden, who has been a Romney man going back to 2004.
I’ve also tweeted Mitt Romney’s press secretary on the issue.
This is a story that could be a killer for Mitt Romney, but will Rick Santorum run with it?
Who will be the first in the elite media to pick up this line of questioning that I’ve begun?
TM NOTE: Let me add here what I said during a conversation on Twitter. Does the media get to choose which politicians get asked tough questions about his or her religion and what questions will be asked? The traditional media was all over candidate Obama about Jeremiah Wright, which I covered extensively as well. There is absolutely no reason not to ask what are obvious questions of Mitt Romney, especially given the backdrop of the Weisel revelations and subsequent apology by the Mormon Church. Cable talking heads are uncomfortable asking about Romney’s religion why, exactly? If religion is going to be a seminal part of our political process, which Rush and Sean Hannity make it daily, as do talking heads like Joe Scarborough, making wild links between contraceptive mandate and female Southern Baptist deacons being mandated by the fed, then honest questions are worth asking of Mr. Romney. annity brings up Rev. Jeremiah Wright still, so why is Mr. Romney’s prior involvement in baptizing the dead not an appropriate question and topic to explore? Disclosure: my husband Mark is a recovering Mormon and has six children, all Mormon, whom I love dearly.
The bishops’ opposition to contraception is not an argument for a “conscience exemption.” It is a way of imposing Catholic requirements on non-Catholics. This is religious dictatorship, not religious freedom. – Contraception Con Men, by Garry Wills
Mama’s pleased.
This whole free contraceptive mandate has the First Lady written all over it.
…and maybe we just found out the value of Valeria Jarrett.
Or not, but we know women made it possible for Pres. Obama to stand up.
Nobody starts out looking to get an abortion. But it is legal. It’s a mighty heavy outcome so if we can prevent it we must.
What just occurred has been brewing for a long, long time and is what we’ve been waiting for, which is the end of the most common abortions. The whole delicious design of reproductive goo simply has to merge with contraceptive access, regardless of means.
People have sex.
For pleasure.
Only.
It’s not a coincidence that at a moment of economic breath the free contraceptive mandate would come along. It fits the rhythm.
Sen. Roy Blunt popping up does too. He’s driven by demons to close the dam. It’s so very un-Missourian of him, because like myself, he hails from the state of the mighty Mississippi, the Big Muddy. But Republicans today like to shut off streams and rivers, clog up all natural slopes and fertile ground, swap poison wolves for energy. They’re like adolescent boys of destruction.
Rep. Darrell Issa proved this point and more when he refused witnesses on behalf of women in his all-male hearing titled “Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State. Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Conscience?”
I lived in Los Angeles during the puritanical Reagan era and there were so many underground clubs, cocaine and pills, fast cars and yuppy mafias you couldn’t throw a g-string without hitting one. But Reagan screwed the economic pooch, because it was all built on testosterone.
Then came the Big Dawg. The other side of the track Jack.
The Clinton era was wet and fertile. Even that guy Gingrich who was targeting America’s Bubbah was screwing around, this time on his sick second wife. Everybody was making money, but they were also having lots of sex, too. The kind of sex women like, not just checking off daddy’s list. The poorest still got screwed, because America talks that game better than solves it, but for a while America’s cut overflowed. Even the Big Dawg got off.
Ken Starr wrote bad porn, so the people pilloried the prosecutor.
William F. Buckley said it to Charlie Rose — who else? — once. Conservatives are against things, they oppose, that’s what they do, who they are.
If this contraceptive mandate decision stands, with the White House saying openly they didn’t expect to get all Catholics or the bishops approval, but they’re comfortable with that because this is the right decision, then the moment has finally arrived. The very case I proffered and proved in the chapter “Is Freedom Just for Men?” in The Hillary Effect manifest.
Somewhere between creating it and having the heart to hear the women whispering in your ear you start to know what’s right. You start to learn you won’t get religious conservatives, because they’re against everything, but maybe you don’t need them.
Abigail Adams said that women should not hold ourselves bound to any laws in which we have no voice or representation.
The number of women, regardless of religion, who rely on contraception or birth control is in the 99 percentile.
People have sex.
It’s good for us.
You can’t stop it from happening. But you can come prepared.
Despite the deep divide between some religious leaders and government officials over contraceptives, the latest New York Times/CBS News poll found most voters support the new federal directive that health insurance plans provide coverage for birth control. – New York Times/CBS Poll
Liz Trotta on Fox News Channel is a perfect bookend to the stupidity being spewed by Rick Santorum. Watch the video above.
If you want to know why this country is in the shape it is today, Rick Santorum’s rhetoric provides the backdrop, which Fox News Channel is sucking up with a straw. On other shows he’s treated with deference instead of being laughed off the set for being obsessed with sex other people are having.
“One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.”
It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also [inaudible], but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.
Again, I know most Presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are. I’m not running for preacher. I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues. These how profound impact on the health of our society.
If you’re not appalled by the statements on sexuality by Rick Santorum you are also part of America’s problem.
Why are pundits on TV giving Rick Santorum anything but the laugh out loud treatment? Our media has to respect this man? Who decided statements like this one are worthy of respect, let alone seriousness?
All this happens as TIME magazine offers an American cover on animal friendships, while their overseas covers Italy’s new prime minister and whether he can make the difference in Europe. Americans wouldn’t possibly be interested in the financial crisis and what’s happening in Europe, let alone buy a magazine who covers it.
It’s why we get someone like Lawrence O’Donnell doing an entire hour about Whitney Houston’s death, while Piers Morgan does day after day of tick tock on it. It’s a tragedy and she was a music icon, but let’s not pretend she was something she wasn’t. An hour on substance abuse and the demise of African American performers might be more appropriate, which O’Donnell did at least mention.
What we could use an hour on is the dumbing of America and the absurd notion being pushed that Obama’s contraceptive mandate is about the Catholic Church’s religious freedom, and why pundits find this more important than the fact that the First Amendment swings both ways, protecting the individual from religious institutions [this section has been edited for clarity].
There’s a reason Americans are uninformed. It’s also why parts of America are becoming more conservative, why Fox News Network has more viewers who are misinformed, while MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” gives TIME magazine’s managing editor Rick Stengel an entire segment to roll out his “animal friendships,” a cover only for Americans, drivel every week.
Stewart is on these stories, as well as Santorum’s insulting slur against female soldiers. It’s the reason Stewart’s trusted and so popular with young people who cannot take the gibberish adults are being fed on the cable talk fest faux news entertainment shows. On FNC, MSNBC, CNN viewers get treated like children. On Stewart they are not, especially where sex and American life is concerned.
Yes, Rick Santorum, people have sex for pleasure. Because of this we need contraception far past the age a woman can conceive. It’s how American women and men live.
Like Donald Trump, Herman Cain, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum is just the latest Republican unfit for the presidency. But considering most of American media isn’t fit to cover a serious presidential election, we’ve got the situation we deserve.
So much for keep calm and carry on, what Joe Scarborough proclaims to be his motto.
It was the weirdest one-on-one back and forth with a high profile talking head imaginable. It makes high school look mature. It began with a Joe Scarborough blast of venom and didn’t let up until he’d finished unloading.
Just because two people follow each other on Twitter doesn’t give anyone special privileges to assume something that hasn’t been mutually agreed upon. If you want to be off the record, make sure that’s been established.
Not satisfied with President Obama’s new religious accommodation, Republicans will move forward with legislation by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) that permits any employer to deny birth control coverage in their health insurance plans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Sunday. – McConnell: GOP Will Fight To Let ANY Employer Deny Birth Control Coverage
Pres. Obama’s contraceptive mandate has made Republicans lose their minds. They’re in full panic over the prospect of Obama and the Democrats handing women their own Social Security. The demographics of it have them reeling.
Criticizing the elite media is tricky business in Washington, D.C. But media is one of the things I cover. This isn’t a secret. The Hillary Effect, my recently published book, lays out the media’s role during the 2008 election season, as well as recounts Hillary’s 20-year rise.
When you have a conversation with someone in my business it’s on the record unless specified otherwise. I don’t know how anyone could think otherwise. DMs or Direct Messages on Twitter are simply between two individuals following each other; they’re also in writing and a record of the conversation. I talked to no one who disagreed on these facts.
This all began when I cited Joe Scarborough from his show on February 9, in context and accurately, after he made an outrageous comparison on Pres. Obama’s contraception mandate. You can see the discussion starting at around 6:50 in the video above.
“… I think women should be deacons as well as men. But if the federal government, if the Justice Department offers a mandate ordering Southern Baptists to make women deacons, I would be the first to say get the hell out of our business.” – Joe Scarborough (9 February)
While Mr. Scarborough is talking you can see Mika Brzezinski start to question in her own mind what he’s saying, then after he finishes she blanches and replies:
“…This is not a parallel.” – Mika Brzezinski
Joe shot back, “It is a parallel, too.”
Obviously, it’s not. In fact, it’s not even close to a parallel, because the only thing the Obama administration made very clear from the start is that all churches were exempt from his new policy. I’ll let you attorneys argue over why Scarborough decided to bring up a federal female deacon mandate, because it makes absolutely no sense.
After citing Scarborough’s quote in my column, I analyzed the situation like this:
That quote tells you all you need to know about this debate.
Scarborough’s quote above is a good example of the disingenuous nature of the argument being made by religious conservatives. It is one of the most preposterous falsehoods said yet. That Joe Scarborough chose to say it and then defend it reveals how low Republicans will go to make a religious point even if it’s false.
Calling him out on his quote and my analysis of it precipitated 23, 140 character DM exchanges over the weekend, initiated by Joe Scarborough. Oh, and the conversation was ended by Scarborough, too. But only after he was done venting in his final DM outburst. He then un-followed me, take that!
I’m crushed. Really.
Below are the first 2 DMs from Scarborough, no hello, just an attack out of the gate:
Here’s my first response:
Invoking Glenn Beck, we both sound like idiots.
Another one from Scarborough:
Later I even played my Harry card.
I thought it was humorous and Lord knows this travesty needed it.
Everybody makes mistakes and there’s no crime in it. Admit it, correct the record, move on. What you don’t do is dig in. I also don’t understand why in the world Joe Scarborough found this so important that he had to go off over the weekend in a string of insulting DMs.
It’s just too weird for words.
Ms. Brzezinski had challenged him, but the difference with me was that in a one-on-one* conversation I wouldn’t yield the point, because whoever Joe Scarborough thinks he is he is not beyond criticism when he’s wrong.
There was enough misinformation flying over the contraceptive mandate, with the Obama administration not helping at all the way they rolled it out.
I stand by what I sent in my tweet on this column that also included the link to it:
Pres. Obama Knew Firestorm Was Coming on Contraception Mandate. A stunningly dishonest quote from @morning_joe
My last DM to Scarborough, once again bringing it back to the issue, which he wouldn’t addrress.
Mika blanched too when u said it bcuz it was wrong. I called u on it & u won’t admit you were wrong. 1stAmend goes BOTH WAYS, to workers too
16h Don’t know why u name-call, digg in, epithets instead of admitting what u said was wrong. Ego a dangerous master. Honesty requires humility
He didn’t like that anymore than he liked my Harry Truman witticism.
So now Joe and I both have one less Twitter follower and I won’t be bothered with rude DM rants on my weekend from him, including one coming in at around 4:30 a.m. on Sunday morning.
“Morning Joe” is one of the few shows that acquitted themselves well during the ’08 primary fight, which I cover in my book The Hillary Effect. It’s how I became a regular viewer to the show.
Joe Scarborough plays a nice guy on “Morning Joe” pretty well.
When he’s in alone and you’ve called him out on something he said and he won’t admit he’s wrong, he goes into the old Lee Atwater – Newt Gingrich-style right wing attack playbook. Never admit you’re wrong, because the other person always is, ignore the facts and just keep attacking.
From Scarborough’s “Glenn Beck-like extremism” invective to “those right wing freaks who tried to trample on Muslims’ rights this summer at Ground Zero,” I was the villain. I’m not even sure what the hell he’s talking about on that last Ground Zero Muslim thing and I’m not sure he does either. It makes as much sense as his fantasy federal mandate for female deacons analogy.
Joe Scarborough can be one person on “Morning Joe” and another person when dealing one-on-one with someone in new media, that’s his prerogative.
But he really should change his graphic “Keep Calm and Carry On,” unless he’s trying to be ironic.
TM NOTE:The conversation was one-on-one not “private.” There was no agreement by anyone to keep it off the record or otherwise. Someone high profile doesn’t get to abuse the privilege of simply being followed on Twitter by launching into an insulting tirade with the expectation of “privacy” without first having the grace and respect to say he or she wants the conversation to be off the record. I have no special relationship with JS. We followed each other on Twitter. This is also not the first DM rant I’ve exchanged with Scarborough. I sought advice on the subject and I stand firm that my decision was correct and stand by it unflinchingly.
It’s Not News that Romney Can Win MITT ROMNEY’S LUCKY the Republican primaries unmasked his warts long before anyone started paying attention. Sure America saw the clown [...]
The Choice for Romney is Liz Cheney Why not the best for President Obama and the Democratic party? And how much more will victory be worth having [...]
Oh Donna, How We Danced DONNA SUMMER was writing “Love to Love You Baby”; I was Miss Missouri. “Last Dance” came out in 1978, the [...]
Capitalism Out of the Closet **UPDATED** Would we be any worse off with Stephen Colbert as president? I doubt it. Politifact has watched the video [...]
Not Disappointed in Pres. Obama **Postscript added** President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics [...]
Fan Politics Despite rising public concern about the federal budget deficit, Americans favor keeping Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are [...]
