Mario Piperni dot Com

.

Conservative media, being led by those diligent “newshounds” at Fox, now feel they have the goods on the proposed Islamic center’s Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf for this remark he made in 2005.

“We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than Al Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non-Muslims,” said Imam Fiesal Abdul Rauf, speaking at the Bob Hawke Prime Ministerial Center during a question and answer session dedicated to what sponsors say was a dialogue to improve relations between America and the Muslim world.

“You may remember that the U.S.-led sanctions against Iraq led to the death of over half a million Iraqi children. This has been documented by the United Nations,” said Rauf, who called himself a spokesman for Islam.

C&L’s David Niewart responds.

Now, one may or may not quibble with Rauf’s example — namely, the prewar sanctions against Iraq that Saddam indeed used as an excuse for letting his people starve.

But there’s no doubt that we have innocent Iraqi blood on our hands. At last count, the toll stood between 97,000-106,000 civilians killed in Iraq because we visited war on their country. In 2009 alone — a year in which the toll decreased — there were 4,644 civilian deaths recorded. So much for comparisons to the 3,000 killed on 9/11.

The American Prospect’s Adam Serwer further notes:

It’s very clear what Rauf is saying–that U.S. policies have contributed to misery in the Middle East and South Central Asia and that misery is a key ingredient in a very complicated stew from which radicalism spews forth. That conclusion is entirely uncontroversial in military and intelligence circles.

Niewart and Serwer are right but the damage has been done.  Led by Beck, Pamela Geller, Limbaugh and Fox, the right has set aim on destroying Rauf’s image as a moderate, bridge building Muslim.  It’s no longer a question of how close the Islamic center is to Ground Zero.  It’s now all about the integrity of the Imam himself.  They have cast Rauf as a jihadist villian, intent on destroying their beloved country.  Former Republican senator Rick Santorum…

My thinking was all along if he made the statements that he made, he probably had a lot more that are going to be found out. This man is not a moderate Muslim. This is someone who believes the United States has blood on their hands, that the United States is responsible for this. He is a jihadist, he’s just not a violent jihadist. That does not make him a moderate.

Rauf is a jihadist.  Obama is a Muslim.  Death panels are real.  ACORN stole the 2008 election.  Climate change is a hoax.  Islam is evil.  Up is down.  Down is up and pigs fly.

Anything and everything is possible in Wingnuttia.  It just needs to be repeated enough times.  And when the sheep start bleating loud enough, the deed is done.

___

To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s page. Click on ‘Like’ here
.

.

Rasmussen (the “Republican polling outfit” as Andrew Sullivan refers to them), put out another of their twisted polls which allowed them to make the following claim:

“Sixty percent (60%) of voters nationwide favor repeal of the recently passed health care law, including 49% who Strongly Favor repeal.”

In fact, this is what the poll of polls looks like when all polls by the key polling firms (including Rasmussen) are combined.

.

.

Of course your typical poorly misinformed conservative joe will only hear about the Rasmussen poll and have no idea that it is the work of a fraudulent conservative stooge.  He’ll walk around thinking he’s got the lowdown on public sentiment regarding the health care plan.  He’ll tell his coworkers, family and friends while others will spend time on the blogs spewing out their nonsense.  They’ll get positive reinforcement from Fox, Republican politicians and all the regular suspects who will repeat the lie and within no time, the lie will be fact within conservative circles.

As unscrupulous as it all is, it works for them.

___
.
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s page. Click here
.

.

The so-called liberal mainstream media is a funny bunch; ridiculed so frequently by the right, they bend over backwards in pursuit of false equivalence. Enter the B.P. Spill. The “Obama’s Katrina” theme did not have a long shelf life in the liberal mainstream, but the coverage maintains all of the same tones, asides, and recriminations that Katrina coverage created for Bush. And this friends, is completely ridiculous.

Let’s put this in context again; Katrina (and her full potential scope) was forecast some 10 days prior to the event. Competent management by the Presidential appointee in charge of FEMA, should have begun preliminary assessments and identification of the assets needed for a worst case scenario. Katrina (and her full probable scope) was predicted 72 hours prior to landfall. At this point, knowing that the Gulf Coast between Eastern Texas and Pensacola were going to be hammered, competent management by the Presidential appointee in charge of FEMA, should have begun assigning assets to teams, and begun the assembly of relief equipment and supplies at transshipment centers in range of the likely disaster areas. Katrina (and her actual scope within order of magnitude) were known by everyone watching the Weather Channel 24 hours prior to landfall. Competent management by the Presidential appointee in charge of FEMA would have the full mobilization of all assets, and reports to the President for mobilization of Guard units and other National Security assets should have been sent.

None of this happened.

When the Deepwater Horizon blew up on April 20, the fears were in regards to the 700,000 gallons of diesel on-board. Two days later, the world still thought that the wellhead was secure. Later, B.P. refused for several weeks the release of video monitoring the wellhead. Even so, assets of the U.S. government were on scene the day of the disaster. Their primary mission was the lives of the workers, with the secondary mission being the security of the environment. But this isn’t what the “liberal mainstream” is telling us. Obama, we are told, is ambivalent to the disaster. The President, we are informed, is refusing the help of foreign nations. He is every bit the elitist professor that we were warned about in the election. The story linked here, is a good example of the kind of libelous bullshit the media has been reporting. Read it carefully; under a headline and bullet describing Obama’s refusal of aid, and well past further descriptions of Obama’s refusal of aid, we find that OBAMA DID NOT REFUSE AID. The ability of some conservatives, and ALL conservative media outlets to lie is amazing to me. But, unfortunately, only slightly less amazing than the ability of the “liberal mainstream” to go with the theme. How hard is it for someone in the media to do this:

Should these two clauses be in the same story?

Four weeks after the nation’s worst environmental disaster, the Obama administration saw no need to accept offers of state-of-the-art skimmers, miles of boom or technical assistance from nations around the globe with experience fighting oil spills.

Later;

In the past week, the United States submitted its second request to the European Union for any specialized equipment to contain the oil now seeping onto the Gulf of Mexico’s marshes and beaches…In late May, the administration accepted Mexico’s offer of two skimmers and 13,779 feet of boom; a Dutch offer of three sets of Koseq sweeping arms, which attach to the sides of ships and gather oil; and eight skimming systems offered by Norway

Its all part of the same disingenuous line of thinking that has dominated the last few years in U.S. politics. The President has not been perfect, and some of his tactics are a mystery to me, but most of the headlines scream about stories with no basis in fact. And now we have a real disconnect between those who criticize the President, and the critics’ own motives. I have no problem with liberals who choose to complain about the President’s inability to fix the regulatory regime in his first 18 months. I think it is unrealistic and naive, but there is an integrity to the complaint that can’t be denied. Liberals, after all, WANT the government of we the people, to intervene in the marketplace. Conservatives, on the other hand, don’t want Big Brother in their business.

Conservatives need to shut their friggin mouths!

This disaster is the result of conservative philosophy. “Stay out of the market!” they screamed; for years. They fight regulations (at the federal level at least; conservatives love, as a rule, regulations at the state and local level), and when they can’t beat the regulations, they make sure the rules have no teeth. How many fines did Massey Energy either stall on appeal or pay out of petty cash? How many regulations did SEC and Fed regulators let slide leading into the collapse of the housing bubble? How much porn were regulators watching instead of inspecting the work done on Deepwater Horizon? No, I refuse to accept the bullshit that conservative talking heads are tongue-shoveling these days. Enough is enough!
.

.

Michael Chase publiishes The Rational Middle

___
.
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s page. Click here
.

.

We’re now at a time in political debate where asking a politician to clarify a controversial position they have taken on an important issue is immediately referred to as a “gotcha” tactic.  A number of conservatives have criticized Rachel Maddow for her Rand Paul interview.  Apparently, they feel that Maddow asking Paul to explain the statement he made on the limits of government in respect to the Civil Rights Act was unfair.

$arah Palin:

So you know, one thing that we can learn in this lesson that I have learned and Rand Paul is learning now is don’t assume that you can engage in a hypothetical discussion about constitutional impacts with a reporter or a media personality who has an agenda, who may be prejudiced before they even get into the interview in regards to what your answer may be — and then the opportunity that they seize to get you.

You know, they’re looking for that gotcha moment. And that’s what it evidently appears to be that they did with Rand Paul, but I’m thankful that he was able to clarify his answer about his support for the Civil Rights Act.

Palin’s comment is ludicrous.  First of all, Rand clarified nothing.  He made a statement he was unable and unwilling to defend.  Period.  Secondly, Palin is a woman who believes that a gotcha moment is being asked “what newspapers do you read” so her credibility on this topic (or any topic, really) is nil.

The bottom line here is that Paul made a statement to a newspaper which he wishes he never made – not because he doesn’t believe it but because he’s been made aware that it was controversial.  Radical beliefs have their consequences in national politics as Paul is now discovering (just ask the Arizona state legislature).  Trying to divert attention from loony tune beliefs by making ridiculous claims of unfair ‘gotcha’ moments only works on dimwits.  Which of course makes Palin’s comments on Fox totally effective.

___
.
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s fan page. Click here

.