tagged w/ The Last Word
Things have quickly escalated between the two all week, resulting in a Twitter war, and then finally leading to Trump threatening to sue O'Donnell. Well, Lawrence took to his show on Wednesday night and unleashed on 'The Donald': "Donald Trump could never sue me...I know his big secret."
http://veracitystew.com/2011/10/27/lawrence-odonnell-unleashes-on-donald-trump-video/Things have quickly escalated between the two all week, resulting in a Twitter war,... more
The video images of unarmed and penned female protesters being intentionally maced by NYPD Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna during last week's "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrations have caused a growing public demand for an investigation, and now that a second video has surfaced showing the same officer "getting trigger-happy with the spray, just moments after the first incident," the police commission has no choice but to act...or will they?
http://veracitystew.com/2011/09/28/nypd-under-fire-for-macing-after-second-video-surfaces-video/The video images of unarmed and penned female protesters being intentionally maced by... more
Lawrence O'Donnell did a wonderful job April 13th making it clear that much of the country, many of the American voters do not believe that we are all in this together. They do not believe that those who fall on bad luck and have nowhere to turn should get help. They believe in individualism and think that we are all on our own. They are so delusional and it's hard to understand where they are coming from because not all Republicans could possibly have escaped hardships for sure. How can they think we are all on our own?
What would we do without our infrastructure? How would we survive without the help of our government to provide all the necessities that keep us safe and secure? How could we afford to get an education and educate our children? How would we travel if roads were not available? Who would we call if someone was threatening our wellbeing? Where would we go if we feel violently ill or have been injured? What if any one of us was to lose our income, how would we feed our children and keep a roof over their heads until we find another place where we can earn a living wage?
So many questions to which the people who call themselves Republicans or Libertarians have no answers to. How can they be so fooled? How can they be so misled? Please watch this amazing broadcast of The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell and hear him tell us what we already knew. That there really are two Americas and one is going to destroy the other by its sheer ignorance. thinkingblue
PS: Excellent Essay by Paul Krugman
April 17, 2011
Let’s Not Be Civil
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Last week, President Obama offered a spirited defense of his party’s values — in effect, of the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society. Immediately thereafter, as always happens when Democrats take a stand, the civility police came out in force. The president, we were told, was being too partisan; he needs to treat his opponents with respect; he should have lunch with them, and work out a consensus.
That’s a bad idea. Equally important, it’s an undemocratic idea.
Let’s review the story so far.
Two weeks ago, House Republicans released their big budget proposal, selling it to credulous pundits as a statement of necessity, not ideology — a document telling America What Must Be Done.
But it was, in fact, a deeply partisan document, which you might have guessed from the opening sentence: “Where the president has failed, House Republicans will lead.” It hyped the danger of deficits, yet even on its own (not at all credible) accounting, spending cuts were used mainly to pay for tax cuts rather than deficit reduction. The transparent and obvious goal was to use deficit fears to impose a vision of small government and low taxes, especially on the wealthy.
So the House budget proposal revealed a yawning gap between the two parties’ priorities. And it revealed a deep difference in views about how the world works.
When the proposal was released, it was praised as a “wonk-approved” plan that had been run by the experts. But the “experts” in question, it turned out, were at the Heritage Foundation, and few people outside the hard right found their conclusions credible. In the words of the consulting firm Macroeconomic Advisers — which makes its living telling businesses what they need to know, not telling politicians what they want to hear — the Heritage analysis was “both flawed and contrived.” Basically, Heritage went all in on the much-refuted claim that cutting taxes on the wealthy produces miraculous economic results, including a surge in revenue that actually reduces the deficit.
By the way, Heritage is always like this. Whenever there’s something the G.O.P. doesn’t like — say, environmental protection — Heritage can be counted on to produce a report, based on no economic model anyone else recognizes, claiming that this policy would cause huge job losses. Correspondingly, whenever there’s something Republicans want, like tax cuts for the wealthy or for corporations, Heritage can be counted on to claim that this policy would yield immense economic benefits.
The point is that the two parties don’t just live in different moral universes, they also live in different intellectual universes, with Republicans in particular having a stable of supposed experts who reliably endorse whatever they propose.
So when pundits call on the parties to sit down together and talk, the obvious question is, what are they supposed to talk about? Where’s the common ground?
Eventually, of course, America must choose between these differing visions. And we have a way of doing that. It’s called democracy.
Now, Republicans claim that last year’s midterms gave them a mandate for the vision embodied in their budget. But last year the G.O.P. ran against what it called the “massive Medicare cuts” contained in the health reform law. How, then, can the election have provided a mandate for a plan that not only would preserve all of those cuts, but would go on, over time, to dismantle Medicare completely?
For what it’s worth, polls suggest that the public’s priorities are nothing like those embodied in the Republican budget. Large majorities support higher, not lower, taxes on the wealthy. Large majorities — including a majority of Republicans — also oppose major changes to Medicare. Of course, the poll that matters is the one on Election Day. But that’s all the more reason to make the 2012 election a clear choice between visions.
Which brings me to those calls for a bipartisan solution. Sorry to be cynical, but right now “bipartisan” is usually code for assembling some conservative Democrats and ultraconservative Republicans — all of them with close ties to the wealthy, and many who are wealthy themselves — and having them proclaim that low taxes on high incomes and drastic cuts in social insurance are the only possible solution.
This would be a corrupt, undemocratic way to make decisions about the shape of our society even if those involved really were wise men with a deep grasp of the issues. It’s much worse when many of those at the table are the sort of people who solicit and believe the kind of policy analyses that the Heritage Foundation supplies.
So let’s not be civil. Instead, let’s have a frank discussion of our differences. In particular, if Democrats believe that Republicans are talking cruel nonsense, they should say so — and take their case to the voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=2Lawrence O'Donnell did a wonderful job April 13th making it clear that much of... more
Planned Parenthood accounts for .0083% of the entire federal budget. Yet, its funding nearly drove the government into a full blown shutdown. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell tells you about one woman who relies on Planned Parenthood for health care and a Republican senator who stretches the truth about it in the Rewrite.Planned Parenthood accounts for .0083% of the entire federal budget. Yet, its funding... more
This is the most famous and most-admired African-American woman in the world — Michelle Obama — as seen through the hateful vision of comic book artist Batton Lash. A right-wing blog posted these extremely offensive images of the first lady. Lawrence has more on this story in the Rewrite.This is the most famous and most-admired African-American woman in the world —... more
Lawrence O'Donnell took a page out of his former colleague Keith Olbermann's book when he delivered a scathing condemnation of Bill O'Reilly on his Monday show. Among other things, O'Donnell called his time slot rival a "joke" and a serial liar.
O'Donnell's takedown was prompted by a comment O'Reilly made in a recent broadcast, where he said there were "strains of anti-Americanism" on MSNBC. O'Donnell said this was an example of O'Reilly's ease with falsehoods.
"He has by now figured out exactly what his audience wants to hear, and that's what he delivers," he said. "And when that requires lying, O'Reilly can do it without blinking because he's discovered that there's a lot of money to be made in those lies."
O'Donnell said that he saw in O'Reilly "a very, very, very rich man who has grown phenomenally rich by playing a character on TV that the most gullible audience in the history of television falls for."
He also said that he saw:
"dozens of guys I grew up with who were just like him. Overbearing, argumentative, Irish guys who think they know everything and can back up nothing. Those guys have always been a joke to me, which is why O'Reilly almost never has the capacity to outrage me, because he is just a joke to me most of the time."
The audience, O'Donnell concluded, should not be fooled by O'Reilly's "faux-Irish tough guy style."Lawrence O'Donnell took a page out of his former colleague Keith Olbermann's... more