Archive for executive power

Told ya so! Ailes, Fox "have a lot more to fear from" fired Brian Lewis than Lewis does "from Ailes & his toadies."



ClusterFox indeed.

I so called this one. In my post of a few days ago, "Fox News [sic] boots Executive VP, top strategist, Roger Ailes BFF Brian Lewis," I wrote:

Do we smell a future tell-all book deal?

No, no please... hold your applause. Well, if you insist.

As you may recall, Lewis was the communications chief and a top strategist for Fox who was kicked to the curb after an internal investigation. Apparently, his “conduct” was in question. That conduct related "to financial irregularities, as well as for multiple, material and significant breaches of his employment contract” per the Los Angeles Times.

He was also Roger Ailes’ trusted BFF for decades.

And now he's threatening to leak some gory details about his now-former BFF and, of course, Fox.

There may not be a book in the works-- yet -- but the fun is about to begin. Buckle up!


In a new statement, Lewis's lawyer says that Ailes and Fox News should be fearful of what secrets Lewis may reveal now that he is no longer bound by a confidentiality agreement.

"First, Brian Lewis no longer has any confidentiality obligation to Newscorp or Roger Ailes because of the false and malicious statements made by Fox to date," Judd Burstein writes in a statement provided to Gawker, a website that has long been a thorn in Ailes's side. "Second, Roger Ailes and Newscorp have a lot more to fear from Brian Lewis telling the truth about them than Brian Lewis has to fear from Roger Ailes and his toadies telling lies about Brian Lewis."

This is going to be sooo good. Get out the popcorn. My treat!

get out the popcorn


Fox News [sic] boots Executive VP, top strategist, Roger Ailes BFF Brian Lewis



Talk about a ClusterFox.

Executive Vice President Brian Lewis, the communications chief and a top strategist for Fox, was booted after an internal investigation. Apparently, his "conduct" was in question.

If that's the criterion, then Fox News [sic] itself should be booted.

But back to Lewis; if Fox can't trust their own Big Kahuna-- again, a top Fox TV communications strategist and Roger Ailes' trusted BFF for decades-- then who can they trust?

Let's ruminate on this new lack of faith among the powers-that-be at Fox for a second. ... ... ... Uh huh. Now they know how we feel.

Irony is yummy sometimes, isn't it?

Via the Los Angeles Times:

“After an extensive internal investigation of Brian Lewis' conduct by Fox News, it was determined that he should be terminated for cause, specifically for issues relating to financial irregularities, as well as for multiple, material and significant breaches of his employment contract," a spokesman for Fox News parent company 21st Century Fox said. [...]

A member of Fox News Chairman and Chief Executive Roger Ailes' inner circle for almost two decades, Lewis was one of the most powerful executives at the network. Not only did Lewis oversee the take-no-prisoners approach Fox News brought to dealing with the press and rival news outlets, he was also something of a consigliere to Ailes. [...]

While Fox News is part of a global media conglomerate, it is seen more as Ailes' fiefdom, and the exit of one of his top lieutenants caught other executives within 21st Century Fox off guard. Even 21st Century Fox Chief Executive Rupert Murdoch and Chief Operating Officer Chase Carey tend to take a hands-off approach when it comes to managing Ailes and Fox News.

Ex-BFF Brian was part of Ailes' original team when Fox News [sic] was launched in the mid-'90s. Do we smell a future tell-all book deal?

No further details were given about what this guy did, but it must have been a doozy to cause such an earthquake. Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.



Pres. Obama uses executive power to move gun safety agenda forward


gun defend myself cartoon

President Obama is doing what he can to prevent more gun deaths. Amazing, isn't it, that gun zealots think the ability to gun down a couple of dozen children within a five minute span is less important than legally brandishing a weapon that nobody needs to own?

Remarkable, isn't it, that their needless paranoia about the big bad black man in the White House and his non-existent stomping on their constitutional rights takes precedence over common sense solutions to assault weapons and other firearms falling into the wrong hands?

Every little tiny inch of movement on gun safety measures helps to save lives. But to the NRA, it's not their members who matter, it's the gun industry and all that cash they pour into the NRA's pockets.

Via The Hill:

The president has used his executive powers to bolster the national background check system, jumpstart government research on the causes of gun violence and create a million-dollar ad campaign aimed at safe gun ownership.

The executive steps will give federal law enforcement officials access to more data about guns and their owners, help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, and lay the groundwork for future legislative efforts.
It is unclear whether the National Rifle Association (NRA) will challenge any of the executive actions in court.

If you missed the president's passionate speech yesterday, it's right here.

The move, and several more like it, is aimed at strengthening the quality and quantity of records contained within the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), according to a DOJ spokeswoman.

For years, federal law enforcement officials and gun control advocates have complained that the NICS gun records are not complete, making it easier for people with criminal records and mental illnesses to buy guns

Ooo, scary! Better start hoarding more guns in case the guv'mint comes after you! Seriously, why are gun owners more afraid of an elected official who has never made a move to go after them (let alone go after real criminals like the ones in the Bush administration), and less afraid of (and willing to arm) those who have actually committed mass murder?

More terrifying details here about how that power-hungry Marxist Kenyan dictator, President Obama, is trying to keep more Americans from being slaughtered.


Gabby Giffords, Mark Kelly to do first joint interview since Newtown shooting


gabby giffords 2013 newtown

From a press release from ABC:

Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly will speak exclusively to “ABC World News” anchor Diane Sawyer about an important new initiative they are launching. The interview will air January 8, 2012 on “World News with Diane Sawyer” – two years to the day after Giffords was shot in a Safeway parking lot in Tucson, Arizona. The interview will also be featured on “Good Morning America,” “Nightline,” as well as, Newsmakers on Yahoo!, ABC News Radio, and ABC’s local affiliates. [...]

In the wake of the [Newtown] Connecticut shootings Giffords husband, former Astronaut Mark Kelly, called on lawmakers and the President to “stand up and do what is right.” “This time our response must consist of more than regret, sorrow, and condolence… this can no longer wait” he said in a statement on Facebook.

It appears that President Obama is willing to take on the NRA and other special interests via executive action on gun safety measures. If so, then that should be of some comfort to Gabby, her husband, and other reasonable Americans.

However, until our Congress members come to grips with the fact that military style weapons and high capacity gun magazines are not necessary, nor is fulfilling the fantasies of Second Amendment fanatics, "standing up and doing what's right" may be a fantasy, too.

And someone might want to remind some firearm enthusiasts, including the NRA leadership and lobbyists, that this was no fantasy... except maybe in the mind of a fellow gun zealot:

gabby giffords hospital


Pres. Obama willing to take on NRA, special interests via executive action on gun safety measures



President Obama seems to be sticking to his guns (no pun) when it comes to pushing for common sense safety measures in the wake of the Newtown massacre. He named Veep Joe Biden to head a task force that will determine how the government could prevent more horrific shootings.

Some ideas under consideration are universal background checks for gun buyers, more mental health checks, creating a national database to track the movement and sale of weapons, and tougher penalties for carrying guns near schools.

But lobbyists and obstructionists Congress toddlers members are equally determined to make sure none of that ever happens. Isn't it just like those wacky, zany "pro lifers" to perpetuate the status quo and continue to make military style weapons and high capacity gun magazines available to anyone who feels like killing children?

So what's a president to do?

Think Progress:

[WaPo:] In addition to potential legislative proposals, Biden’s group has expanded its focus to include measures that would not need congressional approval and could be quickly implemented by executive action, according to interest-group leaders who have discussed options with Biden and key Cabinet secretaries. Possibilities include changes to federal mental-health programs and modernization of gun-tracking efforts by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

In doing so, the administration has made clear that it is willing to take on the National Rifle Association and other special interest groups to reduce the impact of firearms in America. Among the ways the White House is seeking to outflank their opponents, according to the Post story, is by working both by working in tandem with law enforcement officials and in convincing businesses like Walmart of the economic benefit to be had in reform.

Now if we could get him to stand up for the lives of those who currently rely, and will rely in the future, on Medicare and Social Security the way he's standing up for the lives of those who prefer not to be shot to death, that would be a another real accomplishment and an impressive legacy for President Obama.


Paul Ryan would play "leading role" if Romney wins. Then why won't he answer any questions?


I got this email alert today. Since I'm not a subscriber, my access is limited, but here's the tease:

Paul Ryan Is Said to be Planning an Active Role: Representative Paul D. Ryan expects to play a leading role in a Romney administration’s drive to enact a budget-shrinking government and overhauling programs like Medicare.

Two things: One is the obvious concern over their agenda. They want to turn Medicare into a voucher system that will cost more out of pocket, and they'd love to cut things like, oh, let's see... FEMA. And that's just for starters.

But the other thing is this: Romney-Ryan’s shunning the press. Both of these cowards are refusing to answer questions, neither will be interviewed and haven't been for weeks. So what we got (or didn't get) during their campaign was a conspicuous lack of details about their policies and plans, a press blackout, and a whole lot of lies.

Yet if-- and that's a big if-- they win on Tuesday, Paul Ryan would suddenly become very visible and is already previewing the horror story that will become the United States of America should they gain the powers they crave so much. He aspires to be the next Dick Cheney, and we all know how that turned out.


Massachusetts lawmakers rankled by Mitt Romney's aloof, CEO "do what I say," "confrontation over compromise" style


Want some insight into how Willard Romney would handle a Congress that is as gridlocked our current one is now? And how Massachusetts lawmakers felt about Romney's corporate style? Look no further:

BOSTON (AP) -- What worked for Mitt Romney in the corporate boardroom didn't fly in the more raucous corridors of the Massachusetts Legislature. [...]

[H]is top-down, corporate management style soon rankled Democrats who overwhelmingly controlled the state House and Senate and saw themselves as an equal partner in the government. His approach jolted a clubby political culture where schmoozing over after-hours drinks and cutting backroom deals are well-worn pathways to success.

Unlike his three GOP gubernatorial predecessors, the politically inexperienced Romney was never at ease in the chummy world of trading favors for votes. He bypassed rank-and-file Democrats and dealt mostly with the party's legislative leaders during his four-year term, though he did work with Democrats to pass the state's health care overhaul. [...]

Some Democratic lawmakers accused Romney of being aloof, unapproachable and not much interested in working with them to build the kind of friendships and alliances that are needed to help pass legislation.

By treating government as a business, he alienated the very people he needed to work with. The only exception was when he worked with Democrats on the type of health care bill he now wants to repeal.

Former House Speaker Tom Finneran said that "Romney delivered a PowerPoint presentation brimming with numbers and charts on his plan for fixing the budget" and that it was obvious that he didn't value input, just went around "issuing marching orders."

There's your CEO, folks. Not exactly conducive to playing well with others.

"Initially his sense was, `I have been elected governor, I am the CEO here and you guys are the board of directors and you monitor the implementation of what I say,'" Finneran said. "That ruffled the feathers of legislators who see themselves as an equal branch (of government)."

There's that sense of entitlement again. This out of touch candidate is most definitely not "one of us," and he appears to revel in his elevated status.

Tom Birmingham, a former state Senate president, said, "To call him disengaged would be charitable." The AP article says that he opted for confrontation over compromise.

So a President Romney would be more of the same, only on steroids.