msnbc: Page 1
Benjy Sarlin of MSNBC doesn't know which side is which. He offers "Is an anti-immigration think tank moving left?" ( peekURL.com/zNddNsL ), about the Heritage Foundation hiring loose borders advocate Stephen Moore as chief economist.
Another misleading Public Religion Research Institute immigration poll (Saperstein, Preston, CNN) - 11/25/13
The Public Religion Research Institute describes itself in the highest terms possible :
Pat Buchanan off MSNBC: Van Jones and elites win; working Americans lose; Teaparty still incompetent - 01/08/12
UPDATE: He's now officially off MSNBC, prompting this question: why couldn't conservatives keep Pat Buchanan on the air?
MSNBC's top executive said Saturday that he hasn't decided whether conservative commentator and author Pat Buchanan will be allowed back on the network.
Former Hawaii Health Director Chiyome Fukino - at the center of the Obama citizenship issue - has given an interview in which she claims that Obama has a valid birth certificate on file in Hawaii. Per her, the certificate is half handwritten and half typed and is signed by the delivering physician. She also claims that the information on the "Certification of Live Birth" ("COLB") shown on Obama's site matches what they have on file.
That settles the "Birther" issue, right? Not really. Those who have concerns about whether Obama is really a citizen due to issues of his father's citizenship or his mother's age will still have those concerns, but that's not an area that's been covered here. And, in order to think that this solves the question of whether Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, one would need to take the word of Chiyome Fukino, something I'm not willing to do. I think it's very likely Obama was born in Hawaii and I think it's likely that Fukino is telling the truth. However - unlike 99.99% of those who've commented on this issue - I've actually spoken with those in Hawaii such as Janice Okubo. And, I don't exactly trust them to a) tell the absolute truth, and b) to care all that much about "mainland concerns".
That's buttressed by all of the lies and misleading statements that have swirled around this issue since it began: the mainstream media has consistently failed to look into this issue in a balanced way. Instead, the media has consistently maintained that Obama was born where he says he was and has lied and misled to fit that preordained conclusion.
"It’s kind of ludicrous at this point," Dr. Chiyome Fukino, the former director of Hawaii's Department of Health, said in a rare telephone interview with NBC.
Fukino, sounding both exasperated and amused, spoke to a reporter in the aftermath of Donald Trump's statements on the NBC Today show last week questioning whether Obama has a legitimate birth certificate.
...No matter what state officials release on the issue, the "birthers" are going to question it, said Fukino. "They’re going to question the ink on which it was written or say it was fabricated," said Fukino. "The whole thing is silly."
...The first [of her points] is that the original so-called "long form" birth certificate - described by Hawaiian officials as a "record of live birth" - absolutely exists, located in a bound volume in a file cabinet on the first floor of the state Department of Health. Fukimo said she has personally inspected it — twice. The first time was in late October 2008, during the closing days of the presidential campaign, when the communications director for the state's then Republican governor, Linda Lingle (who appointed Fukino) asked if she could make a public statement in response to claims then circulating on the Internet that Obama was actually born in Kenya.
Before she would do so, Fukino said, she wanted to inspect the files - and did so, taking with her the state official in charge of vital records. She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files. She then put out a public statement asserting to the document's validity. She later put out another public statement in July 2009 - after reviewing the original birth record a second time.
"It is real, and no amount of saying it is not, is going to change that," Fukino said. Moreover, she added, her boss at the time, Lingle - who was backing John McCain for president - would presumably have to be in on any cover up since Fukino made her public comment at the governor's office's request. "Why would a Republican governor — who was stumping for the other guy - hold out on a big secret?" she asked.
Her second point - one she made repeatedly in the interview - is that the shorter, computer generated "certification of live birth" that was obtained by the Obama campaign in 2007 and has since been publicly released is the standard document that anybody requesting their birth certificate from the state of Hawaii would receive from the health department.
The document was distributed to the Obama campaign in 2007 after Obama, at the request of a campaign official, personally signed a Hawaii birth certificate request form downloaded on the Internet, according to a former campaign official who asked for anonymity. (Obama was "testy" when asked to sign the form but did so anyway to put the issue to rest, the former campaign official said. The White House has dismissed all questions about the president's birth as "fictional nonsense.")
The certification that the campaign received back —which shows that Obama was born in Honolulu at 7:24 p.m. on Aug. 4, 1961 — was based on the content of the original document in state files, Fukino said.
"What he got, everybody got," said Fukino. "He put out exactly what everybody gets when they ask for a birth certificate."
Hawaiian officials say that the certification is, in fact, only one piece of abundant evidence of Obama's birth in Hawaii. Joshua Wisch, a spokesman for the Hawaii attorney general's office, noted that a public index of vital records, available for inspection in a bound volume at the Health Department's Office of Health Status Monitoring, lists a male child named "Obama II, Barack Hussein" as having been born in the state.
...Even Fukino accepts that her comments are not likely to end the matter for the die-hard birthers. Trump and other skeptics have questioned why the original birth certificate has not been released.
But Wisch, the spokesman for the attorney general's office, said state law does not in fact permit the release of "vital records," including an original "record of live birth" — even to the individual whose birth it records.
"It's a Department of Health record and it can't be released to anybody," he said. Nor do state laws have any provision that authorizes such records to be photocopied, Wisch said. If Obama wanted to personally visit the state health department, he would be permitted to inspect his birth record, Wisch said.
But if he or anybody else wanted a copy of their birth records, they would be told to fill out the appropriate state form and receive back the same computer generated "certification of live birth" form that everybody else gets - which is exactly what Obama did four years ago.
1. Note that Fukino sounds more like an exasperated Obama supporter than an objective finder of fact.
2. Fukino also seems to think there's some real difference between the Republicans and Democrats, when in fact both are part of the greater "Establishment". Does anyone think a hack like Linda Lingle would reveal some big secret about Obama if she knew of it, and thereby dash the hopes of the first black candidate who stood a real chance at the presidency? Note also that Lingle lied about what Fukino's statement said; see her name's link.
3. And, of course, Obama could get them to release anything he wanted them to release. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to fool you.
UPDATE: Hawaii state senator Sam Slom thinks that one reason why Obama won't release his full certificate is that could show his father to be different than Obama Sr. (link). On the topic of this post:
(Aaron Klein) also asked Slom about recent statements made by former Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino to MSNBC, in which she claimed Hawaii law prevents Obama's long-form birth certificate from being disclosed, even to Obama himself.
"I didn't hear the statements on MSNBC," Slom admitted, "but I do not believe that part is true."
The video at peekURL.com/vzfn684 shows Rachel Maddow lying to her viewers about the provisions of the new Arizona immigration law. She says:
It's remarkable legislation that requires police officers in Arizona to demand the paperwork of anyone they think looks like he or she might be an illegal immigrant... ...[Referencing Jan Brewer's comments] There will be no racial profiling in Arizona... except for the part where police officers now have to stop you if they think you look illegal.
Maddow also references legal immigrants who "aren't carrying all of their immigration paperwork with them at the time", gesturing as if it would be a large amount. Contrary to the impression she's trying to give, a green card is actually a small document. Further, as already pointed out, legal immigrants are already required by federal law to carry their green card or similar.
As was discussed here back in June, Rachel Maddow smeared Rush Limbaugh by falsely claiming that he'd said that James Earl Ray deserved a "posthumous Medal of Honor" when that quote had simply been made up by someone at Wikiquote. Now, finally, four months later, Maddow has offered a non-correction "correction". Per this, on last night's show on MSNBC she said (bolding added):
And finally, a quote falsely attributed to talk show host Rush Limbaugh recently it resurfaced during the debate over whether or not he would or should be part of a group bidding to buy the St. Louis Rams football steam.
On June 3rd, as I was reporting on opposition to then-Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, I was among the people who erroneously referred to the quote if Mr. Limbaugh had said it.
To set the record straight, Rush Limbaugh apparently never said that Martin Luther King Jr.`s assassin should receive the Medal of Honor. And I was in error when we reported that we had. Mea culpa.
"Apparently"? A real reporter - or a pundit with any sort of integrity - would take actions such as contacting the book's author (Jack Huberman), his publisher (The Nation), would look through Lexis-Nexis, and would take other actions so no "apparently" would be necessary.
Apparently Chris Matthews is now a "Birther", because on the December 19, 2007 edition of Hardball he said that Barack Obama was "born in Indonesia" and referenced "his Islamic background". That doesn't mean that just because Matthews said it that Obama was indeed born there or is/was a Muslim. However, it does illustrate yet again just how fluid the facts can be depending on who's providing the facts.
Matthews said that in the context of discussing whether Hillary Clinton and her surrogate Bob Kerrey were playing up Obama's Indonesian and Muslim background in an attempt to undercut his candidacy. Was Matthews doing his part? Needless to say, it would be inconceivable for Matthews to say such a thing nowadays without his producers forcing an immediate correction. Apparently at the end of 2007 it slipped right past everyone; as we now know, everything Obama has said about his past is 100% accurate.
UPDATE: For irony's sake, I added a video from July 2009 featuring Matthews badgering Rep. John Campbell over this issue while waving "Obama's birth certificate" (actually, a print-out of a picture from Obama's site). Maybe the July 2009 Matthews should have a talk with the December 2007 version.
One of the reasons why the public appears so wary about Obama’s health-care plans is due to all the misinformation out there. Majorities in [a new NBC News poll] believe the plans would give health insurance coverage to illegal immigrants (55%), would lead to a government takeover of the health system (54%), and would use taxpayer dollars to pay for women to have abortions (50%) -- all claims that nonpartisan fact-checkers say are untrue about the legislation that has emerged so far from Congress. Additionally, 45% think the reform proposals would allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care for the elderly, which also isn’t true.
1. According to FAIR, illegal aliens would be able to obtain coverage, at least given the state of one of the bills (link). More importantly, Obama himself says that his goal is to get around giving healthcare to illegal aliens by simply legalizing them first. And, he wants illegal alien children to be covered under his plan.
3. The other two points are basically a matter of opinion and forecasting. Since a national healthcare scheme wouldn't have unlimited resources, some form of rationing would have to come into play, and that would involve the government deciding that some groups of people get more resources than others.
UPDATE: Calvin Woodward of the Associated Press offers what's called by the Washington Post "FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root" (link). It came out about 12 hours after the First Read article, it addresses the same poll in the same way, and it's also misleading. Woodward states that "[t]he proposals being negotiated do not provide coverage for illegal immigrants." See the first above. On abortion, Woodward basically admits that critics could be right: "[y]et abortion guidelines are not yet clear for the government-supervised insurance exchange. There is strong sentiment in Congress on both sides of the issue."
The Democrats’ bill in the House, H.R. 3200, contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident.
The legislation contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants do not apply for benefits. Republicans offered an amendment to close this loophole — it would have required verification using the existing methods that are already in place to verify eligibility for other federal benefits programs. But, when they were asked to put the language of the bill where their words were, in a party-line vote, House Democrats rejected the amendment to require verification and close this loophole.
The bill also leaves open the possibility that if one citizen family member is eligible for benefits, then the entire family — including illegal immigrants — is also eligible for the benefits.
David Shuster tries to keep left from learning about NCLR giving award to someone who'd proposed genocide - 05/30/09
The attached video shows former Rep. Tom Tancredo appearing on MSNBC's Hardball program discussing with David Shuster the issue of Sonia Sotomayor's involvement in the National Council of La Raza. On the downside, Tancredo doesn't back down from his comparison of that group to the KKK and, as happened during the election, he isn't able to very aggressively defend his points by demanding a hearing.
However, by far the worst part is Shuster trying to keep their leftwing audience members from learning a disturbing fact. In 1994, the NCLR gave an award to the person who'd said the following (see the NCLR link above):
"We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him."
Schuster begins shouting him down around "gringo", trying to pretend that things that Tancredo has said are comparable to the quote above when nothing he's ever said has ever come close. After Tancredo says the quote indicates what type of institution the NCLR is, Shuster engages in some unknown form of logical fallacy by saying, "so, everyone who gets an award is a racist". The other guest was the Rudy Giuliani-linked former Rep. Susan Molinari; Shuster said that she'd gotten a few awards from the NCLR.
Whatever Shuster was trying to say, he didn't understand or (more likely) was trying to obscure the point Tancredo was trying to make: the NCLR doesn't have a problem with "heroes" who propose genocide. Just as obviously, Shuster is a reflexive apologist for such organizations, but he needs others to think up his counter-arguments for him.
I'll let you decide.
Just because I run a site about Air America doesn't mean I actually listen to them. So, it's understandable that I've only seen Rachel Maddow - now of MSNBC - two times. The first time was for a lightweight supposed "take down" of Pat Buchanan which was just a use of smears and innuendo rather than any sort of attempt to counter his points.
This site doesn't normally track the lies of Keith Olbermann since there are so many and no one outside his bubble trusts anything he says. However, sometimes he crosses the line, as he did with tonight's "Olbermann on Palin: Socialist, fraud/Governor doesn't have a problem with Alaska's socialistic collectivism" (link) which contains this:
Who was the collectivist share-the-wealther, who was boasting to the reporter visiting from "The New Yorker Magazine," of having been able to send a check for $1,200 to every man, woman and child in the state since, quote "Alaska is sometimes described as America's socialist state, because of its collective ownership of resources?"
And, the blurb under the video at the page above says this:
In this case, Sarah Palin is accusing Barack Obama of advocating socialism when she literally used that word to describe the collective wealth sharing in her home state of Alaska.
However, the quote in question is actually from the New Yorker writer (Philip Gourevitch), not Palin (link). There's only one instance of socialis* at that page, and it's the writer saying it:
Alaska is sometimes described as America’s socialist state, because of its collective ownership of resources—an arrangement that allows permanent residents to collect a dividend on the state’s oil royalties. It has been Palin’s good fortune to govern the state at a time of record oil prices, which means record dividend checks: two thousand dollars for every Alaskan. And because high oil prices also mean staggering heating bills in such a cold place—and because it’s always good politics to give money to voters—Palin got the legislature this year to send an extra twelve hundred dollars to every Alaskan man, woman, and child.
~~ Who's helping spread the smear? ~~
* User voxlisa999 links to the MSNBC page and invents a Palin quote, one she did not say and does not even appear at MSNBC: "Alaskans Share the Wealth Collectively as Socialists" (digg.com/2008_us_elections/Palin_Alaskans_Share_the_Wealth_Collectively_as_Socialists)
* The HuffPost lies, saying "Sarah Palin is accusing Barack Obama of advocating socialism when she literally used that word to describe the collective wealth sharing in her home state of Alaska" (huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/28/olbermann-sarah-palin-is_n_138765.html)
The only thing Russert did was press them to answer the question; he didn't call them on any of the ensuing misleading statements nor did he point out the downsides of their support. He is simply a hack and isn't willing to call the candidates on their BS.
Please go to campaign appearances and ask the candidates tough questions - the type that hacks like Russert won't ask - and then upload the responses to Youtube. Everything will change if people start doing that: the candidates will realize they have to start dealing with issues, and the MSM will be damaged by being revealed for the hacks they are.
UPDATE: A purported transcript is here. This part does not comport with my recollection of events:
[Allison King of New England Cable News]: So, Senator Biden, yes or no, would you allow the cities to ignore the federal law [via sanctuary laws for illegal aliens]?My recollection is that he would allow sanctuary cities, but I'll wait for excerpts to verify that. Also, King was introduced as having "has been sift[ed] through thousands of questions from across the country". That's one heck of a sifter she's got there, since the question on sanctuary cities was the only one on immigration, and there were no doubt several more worthy questions, including the ones I submitted via their online form.
In his "answer", Biden also said:
Pick up the New York Times today. There is a city not far across the river from my state that imposed similar sanctions... And what they found out is, as a consequence of that, their city went in the dumps -- in the dumpsters. Stores started closing, everything started to happen and they changed the policy.So, either a U.S. Senator bought the NYT's propaganda, or was trying to retail it.
Then, Chris Dodd says:
The Immigration Service came in an raided basically homes in [New Haven, Connecticut], causing a great deal of disruption, disrupting the relationship that was being developed with community leaders...One would hope that a U.S. Senator wouldn't support a potentially corrupt mayor and "community leaders" that are collaborating with a foreign government, but he's a Democrat so what do you expect. Then, after endorsing Bill Richardson's stock "reform" speech, he says:
If it means temporarily engaging in a sanctuary protection here, then so be it if that protects our country.Sanctuary policies would allow illegal aliens who are terrorists to remain here to plot and carry out attacks; see the remarks from September 11 Commission member John Lehman.
Then, after Kucinich reads what's on the Statue of Liberty and after Hillary and Obama try to evade the question but both end up answering in the affirmative after issuing standard talking points, we come to Mr. Incoherent, aka former Senator Mike Gravel:
What's going on? Again, we're in fantasy land. We're talking about a problem -- we're scapegoating the Latinos of our society because we as a society are failing in education, we're failing in health care, we're failing in our crumbling infrastructure, and we're failing by invading countries and spending our treasure.These answers are indicative of journalistic incompetence of the worst degree. All of those candidates should have been torn to shreds if Russert and King weren't simply paid hacks.
UPDATE 2: Video of most of the sanctuary cities question is here. While Biden does say "No" just like is in the transcript, Russert did ask all of the to speak up if they thought the federal government should do something against the cities with those policies. All of them stood there with their hands down until Kucinich started in with his blather. So, Biden got confused somewhere along the line.