When it Comes to Jobs Conservatives Once Again Resort to Pathetic Lies

When it Comes to Jobs Conservatives Once Again Resort to Pathetic Lies

Today, the White House is hosting a jobs forum, “to sound out ideas for accelerating job growth during the worst labor market in a generation,” as Democrats in both houses of Congress are attempting to craft jobs legislation. Yesterday, the administration for the first time expressed support for new legislation, so long as it has a “relatively small deficit impact.”

This effort comes in the wake of a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report showing that the economic stimulus package is having its intended effect — creating or saving 600,000 to 1.6 million jobs — albeit in a weaker than anticipated economy.

Republicans, though, have said that additional jobs legislation “would meet resistance.” They’re justifying this position — aided by the conservative media — by claiming that the “failed economic stimulus” has not created jobs, despite the CBO reporting otherwise.

If there are any conservatives left for who the words integrity and honor mean something, your party has been hijacked by serial liars, crazy birthers, science haters and puppets of special interests.

Is Global Warming a Hoax

ClimateGate: The 7 Biggest Lies About The Supposed "Global Warming Hoax"
CLAIM: Scientists had private doubts about whether the world really is heating up.

TRUTH: Combing through over a decade of personal correspondence, which is then taken out of context can seem to prove just about anything. Skeptics have been pointing to one email from Kevin Trenberth, in which he said, "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." However, this is clear example of cherrypicking quotes. Trenberth was referring to that there was an "incomplete explanation" of the short-term variability of temperatures, but concludes that "global warming is unequivocally happening."

Former Fox News Host Calls Fox A ‘Right-Wing Partial-News-But-Mostly-Opinion Network’
Former Fox News Watch host Eric BurnsIn February 2008, Eric Burns, who had worked at Fox News since the network launched in 1996 and served as “the closest person Fox had to an ombudsman” as the host of Fox News Watch, “was told he would be terminated within the next two months.” Since his firing, for which he said “he was not given a reason,” Burns has largely avoided discussing his former employer. In a September 2008 blog post about MSNBC’s opinion shows, Burns wrote that “Fox is a topic for another article, and another writer.”

Burns has ended his Fox News silence, writing on the Huffington Post that he used to work for a “right-wing partial-news-but-mostly-opinion network.” In particular, Burns takes aim at Glenn Beck, who he calls “a problem of taste as well as ethics”:

I speak out now because it is the time of year when one is supposed to count blessings. I have several. Among them is that I do not have to face the ethical problem of sharing an employer with Glenn Beck.

Actually, Beck is a problem of taste as well as ethics. He laughs and cries; he pouts and giggles; he makes funny faces and grins like a cartoon character; he makes earnest faces yet insists he is a clown; he cavorts like a victim of St. Vitus’s Dance. His means of communicating are, in other words, so wide-ranging as to suggest derangement as much as versatility.

Comparing Beck to Huey Long, Father Coughlin, and John Birch, Burns asks himself “what I would have done if I worked at Fox now.” Noting that Jane Hall — who had regularly appeared on his Fox Show — recently left the network partially because of Beck, Burns admits that he might not have acted “as admirable as” she did:

I ask myself what I would have done if I worked at Fox now. Would I have quit, as the estimable Jane Hall did? Once a panelist on my program, Hall departed for other reasons as well, but Beck was a particular source of embarrassment to her, even though they never shared a studio, perhaps never even met.

I think…I think the answer to my question does not do me proud. I think, more concerned about income than principle, I would have continued to work at Fox, but spent my spare time searching avidly for other employment. I think I would not have been as admirable as Jane Hall. I think I would not have reacted to Beck with the probity I like to think I possess.

It is interesting that Burns would compare Beck to John Birch, considering that before he joined Fox News, Beck told a spokesman for the John Birch Society that they were “starting to make more and more sense” to him.

Conservative Hypocrisy Never Ends, Now its Health Care Transparency

After ripping Democrats for hiding ‘behind closed doors,’ GOP objects to more transparency in health care debate.

On the Senate floor yesterday, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) made a request on behalf of Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) that senators proposing amendments to the health care bill place the text of their amendments online. Immediately following Reid’s request, Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) took to the floor to object to the transparency proposal. Enzi’s argued that, although the bill appears to lead to greater transparency, “we can also see ways that this can limit the ability for the minority to offer amendments.” Watch video at link:

Lincoln “issued a statement chastising Republicans for blocking efforts at government transparency.” Just weeks ago, the Republican Party lined up to accuse Democrats of opposing greater transparency.

Now that conservatives want to try parliamentary tricks to stall much needed health care reform, transparency is suddenly inconvenient. If they want to offer amendments they should be made to put them on line with an explanation for 72 hours before offering such amendments. Too bad that would let America see conservatism is all about stopping progress and giving America the shaft. Its what conservatism is all about, screwing over working Americans and hiding behind fake patriotism.

John McCain (R-AZ) Medicare Hypocrite and Liar

Despite Proposing $1.3 Trillion In Medicare Cuts Last Year, McCain Condemns Much Smaller Cuts In Senate Bill

McCain was for far more drastic Medicare cuts before he was against them. In October 2008, the McCain campaign announced that the Senator would pay for his health plan “with major reductions to Medicare and Medicaid…in a move that independent analysts estimate could result in cuts of $1.3 trillion over 10 years to the government programs.” Those cuts would have reduced Medicare and Medicaid spending by as much as 20% over 10 years and cut into benefits.

In 1997, McCain (along with many Democrats) voted for a series of Medicare cuts as part of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. That act decreased Medicare spending by 12.7% over 10 years and instituted the kind of payment updates that the Senate bill is now recommending. In 1995, moreover, Republicans sought to cut 14% from projected Medicare spending over seven years and force millions of elderly recipients into managed health care programs or HMOs. As Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich admitted, “We don’t want to get rid of it in round one because we don’t think it’s politically smart,” he said. “But we believe that it’s going to wither on the vine because we think [seniors] are going to leave it voluntarily.”

Seniors and concerned Americans might want to send John an e-mail and ask him why he has abandoned traditional American values that include having honorable and honest debates about the issues.

Conservative Astroturf - Seniors Beware of 60plus

Conservative Astroturf - Seniors Beware of 60plus

Conspiracists from right-wing talk radio to street corner screamers to Republican members of Congress—all maintain that the provision and the health care bill that says Medicare will pay for the consultation if you want to get a living will, even though was that championed by conservative pro-life Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia, that‘s actually, secretly a plot to kill your grandparents.

The theory has been presented as fact by Republican members of Congress on the floor of the House of Representatives. It has been promoted by conservative talk show hosts on both radio and on television. It has been Facebook-ed by prominent Republican leaders, like Sarah Palin, who says that she‘s fearful that Obama‘s “death panels” will want to kill her parents.

And now, this bizarre, completely inaccurate, scare-the-seniors, “living wills are really a secret euthanasia mandate” conspiracy theory is the subject of a new television ad that is running nationwide.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) -at link

NARRATOR: For seniors, this will mean long waits for care, cuts to MRIs, CAT Scans, and other vital tests. Seniors may lose their own doctors. The government, not doctors, will decide if older patients are worth the cost.

Tell Congress don‘t pay for health care reform on the backs of our seniors. They‘ve sacrificed enough.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: The government will decide if older patients are worth the cost. Death panels, that sounds awful. It also sounds really made up.

As you may have seen at the end of that ad there, the organization that‘s behind this ad is called the 60-plus Association. What‘s the 60 Plus Association? I am so glad you asked.

As we‘ve done with some of the other groups pushing this kind of misinformation about health care reform, we decided to find out exactly who they are.

60 Plus is a registered non-profit organization. They‘re based in Alexandria, Virginia. On their Web site, they describe themselves as a, quote, “non-partisan seniors advocacy group.” Non-partisan.

A look at the group‘s leadership seems to suggest at least a slightly partisan tilt. The president of 60 Plus is a gentleman named Jim Martin. You may remember him from some of his previous and recent advocacy work, such as the Public Service Research Council otherwise known as Americans Against Union Control of Government. He was also involved with the National Conservative Political Action Committee. Hmm, non-partisan.

Alongside Mr. Martin is the group‘s honorary chairman, Roger Zion, who the Web site itself promotes as, quote, “one of Washington‘s leading spokesman for the conservative cause.” Indeed, Roger Zion is a former Republican congressman from Indiana who authored new book called, “The Republican Challenge.”

That‘s who‘s running this non-partisan group that‘s currently running ads scaring old people about President Obama‘s health care reform plans.

And who has a record of funding this organization 60 Plus? Well, when 60 Plus started lobbying against prescription drug reform at the state level a few years ago, AARP actually looked into who was behind them. And they found that, quote, “virtually all of their largest contributions in recent years have come from the same source—the nation‘s pharmaceutical industry.”

In 2003, the drug-maker Pfizer paid 60 Plus to help defeat prescription drug legislation in Minnesota and in New Mexico. According to the AARP‘s investigation, Pfizer, quote, “hired Bonner & Associates, a Washington-based firm that specializes in ‘Astroturf lobbying.‘ The firm‘s paid callers, reading from scripts that identified them as representatives of 60 Plus urged residents to ask their governors to veto the legislation. Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. later said it had paid Bonner & Associates to make the calls.”

Why does Bonner & Associates sound so familiar? Oh, yes, they‘re the firm that‘s now being investigated by Congress after they admitted to stealing letterhead and writing fake letters to impersonate groups like the NAACP in their coal industry-funded efforts to defeat climate legislation. Same guys.

60 Plus also appears to have had ties in the past to the platonic form of Washington things or people to whom it is best not to have ties. That, of course, would be Jack Abramoff. According to a “Mother Jones” magazine investigation, Jack Abramoff once instructed an Indian tribe to donate 60 Plus, saying that that would help garner support for their legislative causes with the House GOP leadership.

60 Plus is well-known in Republican and conservative circles. And like other corporate-funded P.R. operations, it often takes on causes that you wouldn‘t logically connect to their stated purpose. The 60 Plus Association, which again, bills itself as a seniors advocacy group, they took on a subject they want us to believe is near and dear to the hearts of seniors.

Back in 2003, it was the issue of nuclear waste, urging Congress to, quote, “move forward and approve the safe storage of nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain.” Because seniors love nuclear waste being stored in Nevada. Old people love that.

As we‘ve reported on this show before, the campaign against health care reform in this country is being brought to you by professional, corporate-funded, Republican-staffed political P.R. operations. In this case, an organization that promotes itself as non-partisan but appears to be anything but. These are professional P.R. operatives that are scaring real Americans with increasingly paranoid and kooky lies about health care. And they‘re getting rich in the process, thanks to the largess of extremely interested parties who are more than willing to pay for their services.

Also see, 60plus and their previous efforts to "privatize social security", you know give your retirement safety net to the same people that caused the economic melt down on Wall St.

60plus says they are a grassroots organization that truly represents seniors and is all about telling the truth, "Sensitive" Oil Industry Memo Lays Out Plan For Astroturf Rallies Against Climate Change Bill

The memo -- sent by the American Petroleum Institute and obtained by Greenpeace, which sent it to reporters -- urges oil companies to recruit their employees for events that will "put a human face on the impacts of unsound energy policy," and will urge senators to "avoid the mistakes embodied in the House climate bill."

API tells TPMmuckraker that the campaign is being funded by a coalition of corporate and conservative groups that includes the anti-health-care-reform group 60 Plus, FreedomWorks, and Grover Norquist's Americans For Tax Reform.

The memo, signed by API president Jack Gerard, asks recipients to give API "the name of one central coordinator for your company's involvement in the rallies."

And it warns: "Please treat this information as sensitive ... we don't want critics to know our game plan."

Aside from the astroturf nature of the planned events, which appear aimed at passing off industry employees as independent citizens, the memo also raises questions about the positions of several major oil companies on the issue of climate change. BP and Shell both are members of API, and also of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of groups that supports Waxman-Markey, the very climate change legislation the memo criticizes.

API has spent over $3 million lobbying against that bill this year.