UPDATE from John Cole on following story: And as is the case with almost every hysterical claim on the intertrons, this is turning out to be a bunch of nonsense. I will always be a sucker, it seems.
John Cole: Killing The Farmers Market
These days, it is hard to tell if this is good intentions gone awry or just another giveaway to Big Ag, but this certainly appears problematic:
The panics over salmonella, E. Coli and unsafe foodstuffs from China have heightened the prospects that Congress will enact a measure known as H.R. 875, the “Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009″. radishseedShould the measure in its current form become law, “food establishments”, which to quote Patrick at Popehat “means anyone selling or storing food of any type for transmission to third parties via the act of commerce”*, will have to register with a new federal regulatory agency, submit to federal inspections, and, perhaps most significant, keep “copious records of sales and shipment by lot and label”. Penalties for infractions will be very, very steep.Acccording to OverLawyered and all the links therein, this will essentially kill the farmer’s markets all over the country where I go and buy really good vegetables and locally raised products.
You know what to do. Contact congress.
Benen findsTHE KEYES TO CREDIBILITY....
The "Tea Party" in the nation's capitol is bound to be a great event. After all, organizers are bringing in the big guns.J.P. Freire, The American Spectator managing editor and an organizer of Washington, D.C.'s anti-spending April 15 "Tea Party," announced this morning that perennial presidential candidate Alan Keyes would speak at the event. A chorus of groans sounded at the meeting where this was announced.
Keyes has been a controversial figure for years, before and after his disastrous 2004 Senate bid against Barack Obama. In the last few months, he's returned as a plaintiff in lawsuits alleging that Obama is not a "natural born citizen" of the United States.
The announcement produced a "chorus of groans"? I can't imagine why. After all, nothing says "credibility" and "seriousness" like inviting Alan Keyes to be a featured speaker at your event.
Sargent: Poll: Huge Majority Says Relations With Europe Are Important
This is an important discussion on the role media should be taking (and mostly isn't) in debunking false statements.An interesting new poll from Rasmussen, taken during the last days of Obama’s trip abroad, finds that a big majority thinks it matters whether America gets along with its allies! Who could have imagined that?
Rasmussen asks:
How important is America’s relationship with Europe – very important, somewhat important, not very important, not at all important?
53% Very important
35% Somewhat important
8% Not very important
3% Not at all important
1% Not sure
Eighty-eight percent say our relations with Europe are very or somewhat important. These numbers come at a time when the aspect of Obama’s trip abroad that’s preoccupying conservative critics is Obama’s claim that America has at times been arrogant towards other nations.
The poll, by the way, also finds that a plurality of 47% disagree with that statement by Obama — and that’s the finding that Rasmussen, always in the hunt for good conservative press, chose to headline.
Yet despite that, a huge majority still thinks our relationship with Europe is nonetheless important. This suggests pretty clearly that these majorities don’t really share the priorities of these conservative critics.
A rash of lies and falsehoods April 8: MSNBC's Rachel Maddow points out the surprising number of flatly wrong arguments being made by Republican lawmakers. MSNBC political analyst Eugene Robinson offers perspective.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Benen wonders: IS IT ALREADY TOO LATE FOR THE TRUTH?....
Immediately after Defense Secretary Robert Gates unveiled his recommendations for restructuring military spending -- and boosting the Pentagon budget by $21 billion (4%) -- the response was immediate: the Obama administration is trying to cut defense in a time of war. It wasn't true. It didn't matter.Amato: CNN's Rick Sanchez slams FOX News Fearmongering tactics against President ObamaWhat I'm wondering now is whether, to paraphrase Twain, it's too late for the truth to get its pants on.
David Kurtz flagged this exchange on MSNBC this afternoon, during an interview with former Defense Secretary William Cohen. The chyron told viewers that Gates has announced "deep cuts in military spending," even though that's clearly false. MSNBC's Contessa Brewer asked Cohen to address the administration's proposed "cuts" -- not "what some are calling 'cuts,'" just matter-of-fact "cuts," as if this were plainly true.
Cohen eventually noted, "By the way, it's not a cut. It's a four percent increase."
But I get the sense the train has the left the station, and it's not coming back. News outlets -- including real ones, not Fox News -- have already accepted the bogus notion that Gates' plan cuts defense spending. Republican lawmakers aren't just repeating the false claim, they're practically apoplectic about it. The political world has apparently skipped right over the "some critics of the administration charge...." and gone right to accepting false GOP talking points as fact without debate.
Our political discourse can be awfully frustrating sometimes.
Wednesday Apr 08, 2009 6:00pmRick Sanchez used some air time today to help expose the insanely irresponsible behavior of all the members of the Limbaugh National Committee and their preachers of paranoia. Sanchez played some extremely disturbing video from Youtube by the patriot militia crowd and went over the high volume of shootings that are spreading across the country.
Our pal Mr. Gottlieb, of the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun toting, more extreme version of the NRA joins CNN with Media Matters' Eric Boehlert, who just wrote a piece called Glenn Beck and the rise of Fox News' militia media which piggybacks off of David Neiwert's reporting to debate the merits of the fringe right being terrified that President Obama will take away their guns. This is, of course, leading right-wing talkers to elevate their rhetoric in attacking President Obama and liberals in general, which seems to be having a very dangerous influence. (rough transcript)
Boehlert: Well I think people on the right, the single issue passionate people are desperate to find some sort of opening so they can push this narrative. I mean, Glenn Beck yesterday on his radio show said Barack Obama will take away your gun anyway, one way or another, he's going to take away your gun. This message has been on FOX news for weeks and months and it's not just the gun control issue. They are painting this doomsday scenario, almost mainstreaming this militia idea of tyranny and totalitarian state in America and it's incredibly irresponsible.
Rick: Alan, what do you think of that? Because you know, any independent person that looks at this coverage that we've been seeing, not just on FOX News, but other places as well. It seems alarmist, it almost seems...
Gottleib: Well, I think the alarming thing is not that there's a doomsday scenario, but there's no doubt, nobody can argue that the government isn't growing at alarming rates, at record levels of spending, record levels of...
Rick: It GREW during the Bush administration, where were your concerns then?
Gottelieb: I had concerns then too. but they're not growing at the alarming rate they are right now. Government regulations, controls---everything on individuals is significantly going in the direction to more and more government. Nobody can deny that. And of course, that goes right into the argument of more gun control as well when government wants to regulate people.
Boehlert: Saying government is growing in size is a lot different than saying they're going to come knock on your door and take your gun, that democracy in America is on the wane and that we're going to turn into a socialist or Marxist or fascist, depending on what week it is to Glenn Beck. That's quite a leap and again, it's incredibly irresponsible. We've never seen a television news outfit sort of exploit these kinds of fears before and they're doing it on a daily basis and again, they are basically mainstreaming this militia movement and this militia rhetoric. It's wildly irresponsible.
Gottelieb: I mean you're trying to label everyone in militias being evil, crazy people out there. There are 90 million gun owners out there and they're nor members of militias.
The Pew research Center did a poll that says President Obama is the most polarizing president we've had in four decades..
Rick: Hold on Alan, that's not fair. How can he not be polarizing when people are saying those messages that we have been talking about? If I was to get on the air and start saying horrible things about anyone day and and day out and scaring the bejesus out of you and telling you that the world was going to end as a result of this particular politician, maybe, whether he’s on the right or on the left, on in the middle, don’t you think he would be polarizing?
Gottlieb didn't have much of an argument in this segment. When more government is needed to save a country, how does that justify the hate and vitriol being spewed out by the right especially with no facts to back them up? And without regulation, the entire world almost collapsed under Bush, so if there hadn't been any government intervention, Gottleib wouldn't have an issue to fight against because he'd be out on the street like many Americans are now.
And that Pew research study makes no sense. It tracks approvals between Democrats and Republicans. The republican party is not the same party it used to be and it's a very silly poll to be honest. There is no merit to it. How is a president with a 66% approval rating considered polarizing so early in his term?
Sargent (WaPost-PlumLine): WaPo’s Michael Gerson Doesn’t Read This Blog
It was a bit of a crushing blow to see this new column from former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson in today’s Washington Post.
Gerson — writing about that recent Pew poll finding a big partisan divide over Obama — blasted him as the “most polarizing president” and placed the blame squarely on Obama’s “approach” for producing the disparity between Republican and Democratic attitudes towards him.
“He has united Democrats and united Republicans — against each other,” Gerson wrote, concluding, tearfully, that “it is a sad, unnecessary shame that Barack Obama, the candidate of unity, has so quickly become another source of division.”
But — and this is not an easy thing to bring up, because it means colleague Gerson doesn’t read this blog — none other than the director of Pew’s polling told me in an interview the other day that this is a bogus interpretation.
“It’s unfair to say that Obama has caused this divisiveness or to say that he is a polarizing president,” Michael Dimock, Pew’s associate director, told me. Dimock said this phenomenon is driven by the uncommon Dem enthusiasm, and even the Republican tendency to be more hostile to opposing presidents than Dems.
Parsing this very closely, the person who oversees Pew’s polls thinks Gerson’s interpretation of his poll is wrong and “unfair.” I’ve emailed Gerson and asked him for comment on their difference of opinion, and will update you if I hear back.
More from John Aravosis.
Benen on A RISKY STRATEGY....
It certainly seems counterintuitive. After Republican economic policies produced widespread, shall we say, difficulties, voters threw their support to the Democrats. In response, a shrunken GOP minority, well aware of the popularity of the Democratic president and his economic agenda, continues to push an even more conservative version of the agenda that led to ruin.A GOP strategist told MSNBC that the minority party has a strategy, appearances notwithstanding.
"My sense is we are making progress towards reclaiming mantle of fiscal responsibility, which is first step towards rebuilding," the strategist said. "Obama is hugely popular, which makes for a tough environment. But that will/must fade with time, and we'll get our second look from public."
There are two key angles to this, both of which are likely a losing bet for the Republican Party. The first is that the Obama administration's economic agenda will necessarily fail and the GOP will thrive in the wake of voter backlash. As Greg Sargent noted, "The flip side of this is that if Obama's policies are seen as even modestly successful in turning the economy around, the GOP will indeed get a 'second look' from the public, and could find itself relegated to rump minority status for years, decades, perhaps even a generation or more. Which is to say, it's hard to overstate the enormity of the stakes of the GOP's gamble right now."
Quite right. The other angle, though, is that Republicans wildly overstate the potential popularity of the "mantle of fiscal responsibility." After all, for the current GOP, what does "fiscal responsibility" mean, exactly? We got a pretty good hint when Republican lawmakers presented budget alternatives last week, highlighting the party's vision -- draconian cuts in domestic spending, privatize Medicare, shred the safety net, and reject investment in healthcare, education, and infrastructure.
In other words, Republicans believe that Obama will come up short and Republicans will be in a position to "rebuild" when voters embrace their vision of "fiscal responsibility." But here's the thing -- that agenda is never going to be popular. If the GOP is waiting for the electorate to think this vision has real value, it's going to be waiting a very long time.
Christy Hardin Smith: Is The GOP’s Pissing Match On Legal Nominations Getting Uglier?
It doesn't take a whiz (*rim shot here*) to see the GOP strategy on legal nominations.
With a threat to filibuster Dawn Johnsen's nomination to OLC, the Harold Koh smearing, and now Indiana judge David Hamilton, Specter has become the point man for GOP piss and moan.
Which is exactly what Specter wants, given his upcoming primary fight with hard-right opponent Pat Toomey. Can you say posturing for the rabid primary base? Specter, the only Republican in the room beyond Sen. Richard Lugar who was there sponsoring fellow Hoosier Hamilton's nomination, got his ten minutes of camera time at the hearing and then left. Classy.
Anyone think this is simply a good faith moment of conscience for the GOP? Because I'm sensing some serious dung throwing in the offing.
And so is Nan Aron of AFJ:
A few weeks ago, all 41 Republican Senators sent a letter to President Obama , threatening that they will use filibusters to prevent majority votes on any nominee who will not rule based on the political agenda of the Republican senator from their home state.
But will this whine, grumble and obstruct strategy work?
Aides on the Judiciary committee suggested to me that there are two troubling signs. First: The inability of Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell to reach an agreement on a time for a floor debate and vote on Johnsen's nomination (Reid spokeswoman Regan LaChapelle emailed to say "we are working to get an agreement to consider the nomination, and we hope to do so as soon as possible.") And second: Sen. Arlen Specter has said he'd withhold judgment on Johnsen's nomination until he meets with her personally.
Call your Senators today. Tell them the rule of law is not something they should game. And that you will be watching what they do.
Especially the ones who just a few short months ago were bitching up one side and down the other about an "up-or-down vote."
If your Senator tends to be a conservative Dem, it is especially important to call. Dems hold 56 seats, there are two independents and the GOP holds 41 -- several of the GOP votes are in flux, which means the GOP needs to peel off a few conservative Dems to have a solid shot at preventing cloture. I'd like that not to happen.
Over the two week Easter recess, try to get some face time with your Senators if they are holding any public meetings near you and give them a piece of your mind.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I've had it with showboating over substance. And I'm all ears on ideas on how to combat this.
NOTE: We'll have a live chat this afternoon at 3 pm ET/noon PT with folks from the Brennan Center for Justice about restoring the rule of law and some of the issues that have come up with legal nominations thus far. Hope you can join us!
No comments:
Post a Comment