Archive for Alex Witt

Here’s an idea, Republicans…

ic factor democrat party

Today on MSNBC, Alex Witt interviewed Republican freshman class president Rep. Luke Messer who hails from Indiana’s 6th district. She was questioning him about the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad GOP dissension-slash-implosion, and he pretended to care.

How do I know he was only pretending? He dropped a few hints. One was his feigned concern about said growing division among his fellowGOPers. Or maybe he meant that, but considering the same old right wing talking points coming out of his own mouth, and his record, how sincere could he have been?

Another was when he rejected common sense gun safety law proposals while insisting that he “would listen” to any suggestions as he clearly sided with the radical NRA CEO, Wayne LaPierre (the NRA has given him a 100% rating). But hey, he’s a great listener!

However, the obvious giveaway that exposed him to be the partisan hack that he is was when, as he claimed to support working across the aisle with the new “bipartisan” House members, he repeatedly used the word “Democrat” as an adjective. That’s a well-known GOP slur, or as the New Yorker referred to such language, “The ‘Ic’ Factor“:

To wit:

The Democrat Party has a clear record when it comes to taxes.

And:

Nothing threatens our hard-won reforms and economic prosperity more than a Democrat victory this November.

And:

The difference is clear: if you want the government in your pocket, vote Democrat.

Memo to Messer (and all Republicans): It’s called the Democratic Party.

There’s no great mystery about the motives behind this deliberate misnaming. “Democrat Party” is a slur, or intended to be—a handy way to express contempt. Aesthetic judgments are subjective, of course, but “Democrat Party” is jarring verging on ugly. It fairly screams “rat.” [...]

In the conservative media, the phenomenon feeds more voraciously the closer you get to the mucky, sludgy bottom. “Democrat Party” is standard jargon on right-wing talk radio and common on winger Web sites

So here’s an idea, Republicans: If you want to maintain even a shred of credibility, stop insulting the very party you claim to want to work with so badly. Unless you want us to start calling you “Rushpublics.”

Military judge restricts more materials in 9/11 trial. UNclassified materials.

abu13

Just now on MSNBC, Alex Witt said this (I’m coming in mid-sentence, but she was discussing the Zero Dark Thirty controversy): “…Enhanced interrogation techniques– torture– some will call it that.”

SOME? Or anyone but the Bushies and their stellar, upstanding, patriotic Department of Justice that decided to call it something else in order to duck prosecution of Bush and the Waterboardettes? Torture is torture, and it doesn’t work, it’s illegal, immoral, and just plain wrong on every level.

Clear?

Witt casually tossed off the “some will call it that” as if it were an afterthought, not fact. “Enhanced interrogation techniques” is a Bushian euphemism for torture. That has been well established. Documented. End of story. It’s about time everyone reports about it accurately.

Which brings me to the L.A. Times piece I read today:

The military judge overseeing the trial for alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four others has ruled that lawyers cannot make public even unclassified materials.

The ruling by the judge, Army Col. James L. Pohl, follows an order on Dec. 6 in which he directed that any evidence or discussion about harsh interrogation techniques used against the five men also be kept secret. He issued the ruling despite accusations by human rights groups that the government was trying to hide the fact the men were tortured. [...]

In another development, President Obama this week signed the National Defense Authorization Act, which supports overall military operations but also puts on hold his plan to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay — a pledge he repeated in October during his run for reelection.

Of course, GOP debate audiences cheered waterboarding, which means they were cool with illegally torturing other human beings. So much for the “family values” “pro-life” crowd.

______________________________________________

here; That link includes one specific to only *Fayiz al-Kandari’s story here.

Here are audio and video interviews with Lt. Col. Wingard, one by David Shuster, one by Ana Marie Cox, and more. My guest commentary at BuzzFlash is here.

Lt. Col. Barry Wingard is a military attorney who represents Fayiz Al-Kandari in the Military Commission process and in no way represents the opinions of his home state. When not on active duty, Colonel Wingard is a public defender in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

If you’d like to see ways you can take action, go here and scroll down to the end of the article.

Then read Jane Mayer’s book The Dark Side. You’ll have a much greater understanding of why I post endlessly about this, and why I’m all over the CIA deception issues, too.

More of Fayiz’s story here, at Answers.com.

Quote-O’-The-Day: Pat Buchanan Makes Sense edition

I turned on the tail end of an Alex Witt segment with Pat Buchanan (Someone explain why he is still on MSNBC again?), and they were speculating about John Boehner possibly becoming the next Speaker of the House.

As I reached for the nearest anti-nausea meds, I heard Pat the WonderMouth say the following:

“Nobody knows who John Boehner is, and that’s a good thing.”

Buchanan let the truth slip out. How novel.

The Daily Beast defends Sarah Palin

As I’ve mentioned before, there’s something about weekend cable news that gets under my skin. The reporting is often faulty and/or biased, and this seems to go unnoticed.

Today’s Saturday Seethe began as I watched Alex Witt interview Shushannah Walshe about Vanity Fair’s recent piece on Former Half-Gov Nastette McHurlCans. Walshe all but accused Vanity Fair of outright lying and inept journalism, saying that the article “relied on people with an axe to grind.”

Oh really? As opposed to, say, those who practically stick their collective tongues down Nastette’s throat? Greta Van Susteren, for one. ClusterFox in general, for a dozen.

Walshe complained that the Vanity Fair piece quoted Palin’s  “frequent house guests” who witnessed “screaming fights, a fusillade of curses” between McHurlCans and Former Half-First Dude:

“They took all the canned goods out of the pantry, then proceeded to throw them at each other. By the time they got done, the stainless-steel fridge looked like it had got shot up with a shotgun. Todd said, ‘I don’t know why I even waste my time trying to get nice things for you if you’re just going to ruin them.’ ”

Shushannah scoffed at accounts like that one, which is fine. She claimed she’d interviewed a lot of sources who never witnessed such incidents. If she relies on different sources who have contradictory information, so be it (although her lack of eyewitness accounts doesn’t prove that these little spats didn’t occur). But Witt appeared to be awfully supportive of Walshe, and that’s what struck me.  So did the Daily Beast’s strong implications that the overall veracity of the Vanity Fair article should be dismissed summarily.

Whatever happened to objective news broadcasts?

Oh wait. I know.

Alex Witt: "Who won?"

By GottaLaff

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Video/070310/n_iran_us_070310.vsmall.jpg

I watch Alex Witt and “her boys” every Saturday morning before the dreaded Lockup marathon starts. I’m not sure why I continue to get sucked in to what passes for political discussion between Peter Fenn and ::shudder:: Pat Buchanan.

Why MSNBC continues to allow Buchanan to take up air space is beyond me. But I’ve posted about that before. A lot.

The point is, if I ever get to it, Alex Witt jumped right in with the following question about President Obama’s exchange with the House GOP yesterday:

“Who won?”

That was the first thing she asked. Bang. Because to her, that’s apparently what mattered.

This isn’t a horse race. It isn’t the Super Bowl. Or even a spelling bee. Or a pie eating contest, lottery, American Idol, Yahtzee, or Beer Pong.

No, this was an effort by President Obama to approach his political opponents, to communicate and confront, challenge and respond.

The ultimate goal shouldn’t merely be a quantified and trivialized win or a loss for either side. But that is what the so-called news has been reduced to in a 24 hour cycle.

President Obama said it himself at his Elyria, Ohio town hall meeting:

And I understand why, after the Massachusetts election, people in Washington were all in a tizzy, trying to figure out what this means for health reform, Republicans and Democrats; what does it mean for Obama? Is he weakened? Is he — oh, how’s he going to survive this? (Laughter.) That’s what they do. (Laughter.)

But I want you — I want you to understand, this is not about me. (Applause.) This is not about me. This is about you. This is not about me; this is about you.

It’s not always about cosmetics. It’s not always about superficialities and one-upping. It’s about cutting through the name-calling and yelling and lies. It’s about priorities. It’s about fixing America.

Alex Witt, please take note.

Shallow Thoughts: Shut Up, Pat Buchanan edition

By GottaLaff

Today’s Shallow Thought:

I was watching Alex Witt on MSNBC this morning as she discussed the 2010 elections with Pat Buchanan. She suggested that the Democrats would not be able to hold on to their 60-seat super majority, and asked “Uncle Pat”, “Does that mean the government will come grinding to a halt?”

Pat Buchanan’s response: “Hopefully.”

MSNBC had no problem hiring this anti-American–not to mention racist– windbag as a regular political analyst. Punditiots who advocate government failure should be given less, if any, air time, not more. Vigorous debate is a good thing, and freedom of speech should continue to be alive and well.

But to warmly welcome noxious obstructionists like Buchanan to the airwaves does not serve what’s left of the news media well, because he does not inform, he infects. And that is destructive to a healthy democracy.

That was today’s Shallow Thought. Thank you for wading in.