Fox News, Bret Baier Show Complete Lack Of Respect For President Obama

As many of you know, I have no use for Fox News. Frankly, I see Fox News (and virtually every on air personality that comprises the network) as little more than a communications arm of the Republican Party.

So, based on that, I was a bit surprised that President Obama would take time out of his schedule (with so many important issues on the table) and waste it talking to a representative of a channel that is doing essentially everything within its power to undermine his presidency. 24/7, Fox News personalities take turns taking shots at President Obama, attacking him, attacking his administration, and attacking any and all policies even remotely affiliated with him. So, as President Obama went on the air with Fox News anchor Bret Baier, I knew he was in enemy territory with a man who was predisposed to doing everything in his power to making the president look bad.

Ultimately, Baier miserably failed (in my opinion) to make the president look bad. Actually, Baier came across as a man who had an agenda (one to attack the president relentlessly and disrespectfully challenge him repeatedly). What made the failure of Baier almost a certainty was his ignorance to fall into the same trap that so many right wingers fall into: he underestimated the intelligence and toughness of the president. Several times now, President Obama has challenged the Republicans on their own turf and beaten them like a bowl of eggs. Still, in the back of his mind, I can imagine Baier believing that President Obama was not that spot and probably chanting “teleprompter, teleprompter, teleprompter” in his head (thinking he had the president’s number with no teleprompter … and that the president’s act was little more than smoke and mirrors).

Like so many others, Baier ended up looking foolish and (perhaps worst) came across as an angry, disrespectful and frustrated partisan.

This is from a Washington Post blog written by Jonathan Capehart:

Watching the entire interview made me miss the late moderator of “Meet The Press,” Tim Russert. He would have asked process questions. He would have pushed the president to answer questions he didn’t feel were being answered. But he would have done so in a manner that was firm, yet respectful. More importantly, he would have focused intensely on the substance of the health-care legislation to cut through the clutter, rhetoric and political posturing so that viewers at home would have as much information as possible before their representatives voted.

Baier was less interested in substance (if he was at all) and more interested in trying to portray the president as working some sort of unsavory backdoor deals to pass this health care legislation that conservatives and Fox News (one in the same) abhor.

Baier showed a stunning and complete lack of respect for President Obama and his presidency. I was shocked at the depth, breadth and boldness of his disrespect of President Obama.

Repeatedly, Baier cut off the president when he didn’t like his answers, and came out with right-wing talking point after right-wing talking point to try and paint President Obama as negatively as he possibly could. It’s fairly clear that Baier was in full partisan Fox News mode as he tried to talk over the president and interrupt as Barack Obama attempted to answer his questions. Much like a sports announcer for the flagship station, Baier was playing to his far-right audience by trying to rough up the president with clearly disrespectful intentions. To a large extent, Bret Baier was playing to his right-wing audience.

Here is a line from a column written by Boyce Watkins that caught my attention:

The right wing doesn’t hate Obama just because he’s black. They hate him because he’s an “uppity negro” who doesn’t agree with them. This story was predictable long before it ever took place.

I think Dr. Boyce is right on the money. Many conservatives see President Obama as overstepping his bounds and being out of his place in society.

Bret Baier’s actions, during this Fox News interview, were a sign of how a lot of conservatives feel about President Obama, and it is not just because of his politics.

He was speaking for millions of individuals on the far right who have no respect for this president and have nothing but contempt for his presidency.

Fox News Boycott:
http://foxnewsboycott.com/fox-news/bret-baier-interrupts-president-obama-16-times/

UPDATE: Watch the difference between how Baier practically gets on his knees sucks off President George W. Bush while practically spitting on President Obama. This is from Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/18/baier-bush-obama/

Republicans Smacked Down By President Obama

I think the stunning arrogance of the Republicans, who have been reading their own talking points far too much, came back to bite them in the ass in Baltimore last week. The Republicans welcomed President Obama to their annual retreat last week in Baltimore (maybe with the thought they could make him look bad on national television). It was a big mistake. One has to imagine the Republicans never knew what hit them by the time everything was said, done and written (unless you watch Fox News which still tried to spin it negatively for the president). President Obama went onto Republican turf, handled all the partisan attacks, misleading information, fear mongering and falsehoods with dignity, class and intelligence.

With relative ease, the president smacked down most, if not all, of the Republican falsehoods and misleading attacks with charm, poise and intelligence. In all honesty, President Obama made the Republicans looked like a bunch of angry obstructionists using fear, misleading information, false information and hatred as weapons of attack. The president came off looking like a good guy trying to do the right thing while the Republicans came off looking angry and politically hateful.

This is from Think Progress:

House Republicans were fired up and ready to go for their conversation with President Obama at their annual retreat today. According to the New York Times, members of the conservative Republican House Conference said they were “itching to quiz the president and present their policy ideas rather than listen to another lofty presidential address.” Although such sessions generally occur behind closed doors, Republicans agreed to open it up after the White House said it was willing to do so. However, after Obama’s strong performance, some Republicans are now regretting that decision. As Luke Russert reported on MSNBC:

RUSSERT: Tom Cole — former head of the NRCC, congressman from Oklahoma — said, “He scored many points. He did really well.” Barack Obama, for an hour and a half, was able to refute every single Republican talking point used against him on the major issues of the day. In essence, it was almost like a debate where he was front and center for the majority of it. … One Republican said to me, off the record, behind closed doors: “It was a mistake that we allowed the cameras to roll like that. We should not have done that.”

Here is the bottom line: The Republicans believed all of that garbage about teleprompters and questioned the president’s intelligence. They underestimated him (mainly his intelligence) and ended up looking REALLY bad as  he handled all of their questions and attacks as if he knew what they were going to say (because he did know what they were going to say).

President Obama was right about how vulnerable these Republicans become with their own base because of how hateful the rhetoric from the far right has become. He turned on the charm and used reason to expose the anger of the far right in attacking his administration. As the president asked how can the far right work with the president when they’re buying into (initiating or advancing) the garbage that he is a fascist, a socialist, he’s trying to harm old people, he is trying to take over government and so on and so forth? They can’t unless they are willing to risk the wrath of people who hated Barack Obama from the moment they first saw him.

But, back to my main point: Republicans made a mistake.

They underestimated Barack Obama and he made them look really bad on a national stage (unless you watch Fox News in which case you would not have seen the entire exchange as they turned away to begin bashing him with right-wing talking points … disguised as fair and balanced).

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/29/russert-gop-obama/
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/29/obama-gop-retreat/

Good Point Made By Crooks And Liars Blog

It’s really not that big a surprise that the far right Fox News network was clearly disappointed that President Barack Obama destroyed the Republicans as he went to their retreat, took all of their questions and swatted them all down with relative ease. Crooks and Liars makes a great point that, instead of talking about the event, the Republicans had to punt (rethink strategy and ultimately go back to attacking the State of the Union address).

I like this paragraph from Crooks and Liars:

Sean Hannity and Newt Gingrich attack the President’s State of the Union address as angry, whining, self-justifying, not exactly honest, petulant and unpresidential. Project much boys? Of course no mention of the verbal beating the House Republicans took from the President during their retreat that Fox decided to quit airing after it was obvious it wasn’t going well for them. Hannity was too busy doing what looked like a Presidential campaign ad for Newt when they weren’t attacking Democrats for the better part of this segment instead.

As we know, Fox News is where Republicans go to run the silent phase of their presidential campaigns (Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, etc.).

If President Obama had looked bad, Hannity and Bill O’Reilly would have hammered him with it all night long.

Instead, they pretty much ignored the beating President Obama gave the Republicans.

President Obama Talked About Jobs Lost During The Last Two Years

Here is an interesting little nugget, at Booker Rising, I found from a conservative writer attacking President Obama’s State of the Union speech:

Quentin Banks, a conservative in St. Louis, Mo.: “Did he mention the 4 1/2 million jobs lost under his administration in the last year? He didn’t? Surprise, surprise.”

Here is an excerpt from President Obama’s State of the Union address on Jan. 27:

But the truth is, these steps won’t make up for the seven million jobs that we’ve lost over the last two years. The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth, and finally address the problems that America’s families have confronted for years.

Since he mentioned the last two years I think the last year fits into that timeframe.

More Irrational Reaction From President Obama’s State Of The Union

President Obama’s State of the Union address really stirred something in those on the far right.

Here is another example from the blog Booker Rising:

Paige Perkins, a conservative Republican, writes on Facebook: “Obama’s SoTU Checklist: Blame Republicans, Blame Republicans, Blame Bush, Encourage bi-partisanship, Declare it’s not my fault, Pat myself on the back, Deliver bad news, Repeat as necessary.”

This is an anger point for many conservatives.

Paige missed the part where President Obama talked about what his administration has added to the deficit. Pointing out the facts (about the state of the economy when President Obama took office) is not blaming.

In baseball, just because a relief pitcher comes in does not mean he assumes responsibility for the runners on base. The starting pitcher bears some responsibility.

Apparently Serving The Government Is Not As Noble To At Least One Conservative

It used to be considered noble to serve the public or to serve the government in some way, but apparently those days are gone in the eyes of some conservatives.

Here is a comment from the blog Booker Rising:

Jennifer Burke, a conservative in Washington, writes on Facebook: “And there it is…..let’s increase the already bloated government by rewarding those who go into government service with a forgiveness of student loans in half the time than if they choose a different career path. (No offense to those who work for the government. I just think that kind of policy is plain and simply wrong.)”

Not sure how she proved that the government being bloated would increase. Perhaps these people would be filling jobs that already exist.

Frankly, there should be nothing wrong with serving your government as a way of encouraging graduates to want to give something back after working at paying back massive student loan debt.

This strikes as criticism for the sake of criticism.

Booker Rising:
http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/01/state-of-union-speech-bookerista_27.html

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “I forgot he was black tonight for an hour”

MSNBC host and commentator Chris Matthews has a habit of making comments that make you shake your head in disbelief.

Matthews offered yet another in regard to President Obama’s State of the Union speech:

MATTHEWS: You know, I was trying to think about who he was tonight, and it’s interesting: He is post-racial by all appearances. You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he’s gone a long way to become a leader of this country and passed so much history in just a year or two. I mean, it’s something we don’t even think about.

I was watching, I said, Wait a minute, he’s an African-American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is President of the United States and we’ve completely forgotten that tonight — completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don’t think terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard — a very subtle fact. It’s so hard to even talk about; maybe I shouldn’t talk about it, but I am.

Well, Chris, we almost forgot how foolish you can be, but then you typically bring us back to reality.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/27/matthews-obama-black/

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201001270078

John McCain … Maverick In Name Only

Sen. John McCain always tried to portray himself as a so-called “maverick” while he was on the campaign trail. But, during and after Wednesday’s State of the Union address from President Obama, for former candidate for the White House proved that he is just another Washington insider playing the game of politics. In other words, Sen. John McCain is a politician like all the rest, as he proved again when he went on Sean Hannity’s far-right Fox News show and uttered the words below.

“What we’re hearing tonight is ‘BIOB’ — let’s call it that from now on. Blame it on Bush. Whatever has gone wrong, let’s blame it on Bush. I think the people of Massachusetts last Tuesday pretty well rejected that line of conversation.”

Voters rejected Sen. McCain’s message during the campaign and should reject it now. The campaign is over and John McCain has revealed his true self as a right-wing partisan who struggles to see any good from the other side and mistakes facts for blame.

John McCain (who wears his far-right cap when he goes on Fox News) must have missed the part where the president accepted the blame for the portion of the deficit he claimed responsibility for last night.

Also, Sen. McCain is misguided. Massachusetts voters likely rejected that Democrats have not done enough to bring the radical change they expected (we’re still in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Democrats are not standing firm on health care, etc.).

Is Sen. McCain crazy enough to think that Massachusetts are troubled by Democrats holding President Bush (whose approval ratings where somewhere around the high 20s to low 30s when he left office) accountable for what happened on his watch? Come on, now!

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/27/mccain-sotu-obama/

Playing Politics With Haiti Is Stupid … Even By Glenn Beck’s Standards

Take a peek at this comment I discovered on Think Progress from Fox News and radio talk show host Glenn Beck, a far-right talker.

Today on his radio show, Fox News host Glenn Beck jumped on the bandwagon:

BECK: I also believe this is dividing the nation…to where the nation sees him react so rapidly on Haiti and yet he couldn’t react rapidly on Afghanistan. He couldn’t react rapidly on Ft. Hood. He couldn’t react rapidly on our own airplanes with an underwear bomber…it doesn’t make sense. [...] Three different events and Haiti is the only one. I think personally that it deepens he divide to see him react this rapidly to Haiti.

Here is one major difference between Haiti and the other two examples cited by Beck. In Fort Hood, the tragedy (13 people killed) happened and then it was contained. In the failed attempt at a terrorist attack on Christmas in Michigan (three people were burned … including the alleged attacker), it happened (or was attempted) and quickly was contained. In Haiti, however, the tragedy continues, people need medical attention, thousands have died or are dying, people need food, people need shelter, people need protection. The U.S. had to act quickly in Haiti for those reasons and in case of potential aftershocks in the wake of such a devastating earthquake.

It’s not a situation where a black president is simply trying to help in Haiti because they’re black, as one prominent right winger suggested.

Hater Rush Limbaugh Exploits Haiti Disaster, Race To Attack President Obama

Rush Limbaugh, who has built a financial fortune and a large fan base on hate, sunk to a new low (and that is saying something by his standards), with his words in the wake of the devastating earthquake in Haiti. The disaster in Haiti, by the time everything is said, done and written, could claim in the neighborhood of 100,000 lives. The death toll, the destruction and the loss of life are so incredible it’s almost impossible to fully comprehend. But, that has not stop the disgraceful and hateful Limbaugh, the lowest among us, from taking this international tragedy and using it as an opportunity to score political points against and take a racially tinged shot at President Obama.

Jan. 13, on his hate radio show, Limbaugh had comments that you can check out on this video clip from Media Matters for America.

Rush Limbaugh never misses an opportunity to take a shot at President Obama and rarely misses an opportunity to use race as a wedge issue.

Still, so many people continue to support this man and so many people wonder why black people turn away from Republicans and are disgusted by so much of what Republicans stand for in this country. It’s a shame (and I’ve written it so many times on this blog) that good conservatives (reasonable conservatives) lack the character to stand up and speak out against hate speech like this from Rush Limbaugh which serves only to divide people. Instead, they either go silent or they make every excuse possible for Limbaugh and his hate speech.

Be honest, this is Limbaugh’s way of using race to attack President Obama for wanting to go out of his way to help black people (suggesting the president would not have done the same, as quickly, for white people … because all black people stick together).

I commend Ed Schultz (and the others who did likewise) for calling out Rush Limbaugh for these unbelievably callous comments in the wake of a disaster of epic proportions.

Rush Limbaugh is a disgraceful man who has no decency. Limbaugh makes his millions of dollars off such hate speech, but what about the cowards on the right who are unwilling to face him on his bigotry. What do they get out of supporting his hate and daily forms of bigotry? Maybe he speaks to what truly exists in their hearts … things they want desperately to say, but lack the courage to say it. Those are the people we should truly fear.

Conservatives Like Bill O’Reilly Want Fort Hood To Be Called Terrorist Act To Attack Obama, Muslims

The O’Reilly Sucks Blog generally does an interesting job of analyzing some of the garbage that Bill O’Reilly serves up on his Fox News right-wing show, The O’Reilly Factor. Lately, O’Reilly has been on a mission to have the tragic massacre that went down at Fort Hood a terrorist attack. This is being done for two primary reasons: 1. There is increasing hatred toward Muslims in this nation. 2. If he can call it a terrorist attack then he can later use it to attack President Obama. Frankly, I could really care less what it is called. Whether it’s a massacre or it’s called a terrorist attack means little to the victims and their families right now. Those who want to force a label on it, and particularly those who are trying to have it called a terrorist attack, are trying to exploit this horrific crime to score political points against President Obama.

Consider this lengthy passage from The O’Reilly Sucks Blog:

The TPM was called Military Controversy. The Army denies they were given information about Hasan talking to Al Qaeda. Billy said they must do an investigation. Then he declared once again that the Fort Hood shooting was terrorism, who decided it, he did. Hey Billy, what happened to we report you decide. What’s really sad is O’Reilly played a clip of a couple Fox News analysts saying Obama gave a good speech at the memorial, and that it proves they are not biased against Obama. What a fricking joke, that does not cancel out the other 99% of the time Fox attacks Obama.

Then Dick Morris was on to discuss it. The crazy Dick Morris claims that the Fort Hood shooting was a terrorist attack, and that it happened under Obama so he is done. What a massive idiot he is, it was one man, in the military. It was not a terrorist attack, and anyone who says it is needs to be locked up in a padded room. A terrorist attack is on civilians, this was a man in the military attacking other people in the military. It’s insane to call it a terrorist attack, the man was in the U.S. military for Gods sake.

These right-wing fools like Dick Morris are actually blaming Obama, Morris said Obama allowed it to happen because he is soft on terror. When this guy Hasan joined the military when Bush was the President, and the military is supposed to police their own people, the President has nothing to do with who the military sign up. Obama has nothing to do with it, yet here you have Dick Morris saying it’s Obama’s fault. This is insanity, and O’Reilly let that fool sit there and blame it on Obama. They should call him Dick (Beck) Morris, it was just ridiculous. The people to blame are in the military and the FBI, they let this guy Hasan go on about his business when they knew he could be trouble, so they are to blame not Obama.

Then O’Reilly had Sally Quinn on to discuss the Fort Hood shooting even more. O’Reilly spent the entire segment trying to force her to call it a terrorist act. She would not do it, and said it was complicated. Then at the very end of the segment Billy finally got her to say it was a terrorist act. But she said it in a sarcastic way, just to make O’Reilly happy, she was not being serious, and she was laughing as she said it. Then in the next segment with Ralph Nader O’Reilly said he got Sally quinn to admit it was a terrorist act, and he was serious, when she only admittted it in a sarcastic way, and she was not being serious. She said we should wait until the military and the FBI decide he is a terrorist, Billy said we already know he is, and 90% of the people watching him do too.

Billy had Ralph Nader on to discuss politics and terrorism. Billy asked Nader about the Fort Hood shooting, he wanted to know if Nader would call it terrorism. Nader said he will not call it a terrorist act, he called it a massacre, and said he will let the military decide what it is. O’Reilly is calling it a terrorist attack. Then Nader told O’Reilly he was not invited on to talk about terrorism, he was invited on to talk about his new book. So Billy tried to do a bait and switch on Nader and he would not fall for it. Then O’Reilly asked him again about the Fort Hood shooting, and Nader said he will only call it a massacre.

O’Reilly would not let it go, and kept talking about the Fort Hood shooting, even though Nader said he was not invited on to talk about it. Billy said Nader was dodging the issue, then repeated that statement 2 or 3 times trying to force Nader to answer him, and Nader got a little mad. Then he brought up how O’Reilly was wrong about Iraq, and that led to thousands of innocent people getting killed, so Billy admitted he was wrong and changed the subject real fast, then he told Nader to go ahead and talk about his book. Stupid O’Reilly tried to pull a bait and switch on Nader and he would not bite, haha, good for you Ralph. More guests should do what he did when O’Jackass pulls his bait and switch tricks.

This is an attempt by O’Reilly and his fellow conservatives to begin to build their case for attack President Obama by exploiting this tragedy at Fort Hood. It is deplorable for these conservatives to use this horrible crime for their own partisan purposes.

Proof That President Obama Can’t Win With Political Bigots Who Pollute Fox News

President Obama spoke out strongly against the tragedy that took place at Fort Hood, Texas and expressed sympathy for the victims and families of the victims of this violent and terrible crime that has shaken our nation at its core. But, as I read an opinion piece posted through the Fox News Web site, I quickly realized that political opportunists who are haters of the president will let no opportunity to attack the president pass unexploited.

Dan Gainor, who is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture, also is a contributor to Fox News with regard to opinion pieces. It is crystal clear, however, that his latest entry to the Fox News right-wing effort is a desperate attempt to exploit the Fort Hood tragedy as an opportunity to attack President Obama utilizing the weakest and most flimsy of material imaginable.

The headline reads, “Obama on Ft. Hood — Not Even ‘Shocked’” to get things started. Then, the sub headline reads,  ”While President Obama called the murders at Ft. Hood  ”horrible” and a “tragedy” and urged “prayers,” the response seemed understated compared to the other incidents.” So, it is not enough that he called the murders at Fort Hood “horrible” and a “tragedy” as far as some right-wing nuts are concerned. Because he did not specifically use the word “shocked” it seems he now is again being attacked.

Here is how hater Dan gets started:

How a president responds to a crisis defines him. President Obama has shown how upset he was after the murder of abortion Dr. George Tiller and after the attack on the Holocaust Museum. But when it came to the Ft. Hood shootings, the president twice gave the incident a limited response …devoting little more than 4 minutes over two separate appearances to the 13 dead and 30 wounded.

In the Tiller case, the president was “shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning.” In the case of the museum attack, Obama was “shocked and saddened by today’s shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.”

But when it came to the horrendous Ft. Hood shootings, the term “shocked” was nowhere to be found. Instead, the initial response was shoehorned into comments he made opening the White House Tribal Nations Conference. First there were a couple applause lines to Native Americans and Obama’s “shout out to that Congressional Medal of Honor winner,” who appears not to have won the medal. (Joe Medicine Crow won the Medal of Freedom — the nation’s highest civilian honor.)

What is striking about Gainor’s comment is he (in true right wing form) comes back to one of their key issues (taking away the reproductive freedom of women … abortion). It shows the obsession on the part of many conservatives with the issue of abortion and how upset a large number of right wingers were that the president and others were outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller.

Gainor is actually counting the minutes devoting to the president’s responses to different tragedies. That is just weak, silly and insulting to the victims of all the aforementioned crimes to use it as a tool to launch a politically-motivated attack.

If President Obama had held a press conference to express his feelings he probably would have been accused of exploiting the tragedy to put himself in the spotlight.

Actually, Gainor goes on to attack President Obama anyway for putting himself into the spotlight.

Then the president addressed the shooting. While he called the incident “horrible” and a “tragedy” and urged “prayers,” the response seemed understated compared to the other incidents. Then, in true Obama fashion, he did manage to make the shootings at least in part about him. “I want all of you to know that as commander in chief, that there’s no greater honor but also no greater responsibility for me than to make sure that the extraordinary men and women in uniform are properly cared for and that their safety and security when they are at home is provided for us.”

To some, that statement is taking responsibility, but two a right-wing political bigot it is about putting yourself in the spotlight. The writer ignores the positive as President Obama salutes the brave men and women who fight for our country and instead chooses to politicize the statement to portray the president in a negative light. Many conservatives have attacked President Obama for not saluting the troops enough, but when he does many of these same conservatives essentially accusing him of grandstanding.

How pathetic can it get from Gainor?

He busts out the stopwatch again.

Two minutes and 39 seconds later he was done and without even taking a breath back to talking about the Native American event. Nowhere in his speech or his remarks the next day did he even acknowledge that the attacker was a Muslim. In his statement after the museum attack, he correctly criticized “anti-Semitism and prejudice” but made no mention of religion in the latest incident.

The Nov. 6 appearance took up just 1 minute 30 seconds and this time it was paired with his remarks on the bad unemployment numbers. In all, he spent 4 minutes 9 seconds to address the attack on 43 Americans …less than 6 seconds per person.

This is beyond childish.

Then, notice the bigotry reveals itself again as Gainor bashes the president for not acknowledging that the accused attacker in the Fort Hood massacre was a Muslim.

Official Announcement For The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”

Oslo, October 9, 2009

Nobel Prize:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

Conservatives Are Already Crying Because President Obama Has Won Nobel Peace Prize

It’s difficult to imagine any Republicans in the Untied States of America winning a Nobel Peace Prize since so many of them appear driven by hatred for their own president.

President Barack Obama was named winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize and, yes, far-right and even moderate-right Republicans now are beginning to come out in force to whine like spoiled children in a toy store not getting their way. But, think about it, should any of us be surprised some on the right now are mobilizing to go into full attack mode on the president because he won this award for working toward increasing the peace around the world?

No one should be the least bit surprised Republicans are throwing child-like temper tantrum mode as Barack Obama has become just the third sitting U.S. president to win the award.

From Think Progress:

Obama is the third sitting U.S. President to win the award. “Woodrow Wilson was awarded the prize in 1919, after helping to found the League of Nations and shaping the Treatise of Versailles; and Theodore Roosevelt was the recipient in 1906 for his work to negotiate an end to the Russo-Japanese war.” (Jimmy Carter won the award after leaving the presidency, and former Vice President Al Gore won in 2007 for his work on climate change.)

President Obama has worked at worldwide diplomacy to rebuild international bridges damaged and destroyed during seven-plus years of the administration of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. While Republicans have blasted the president for criticizing America, in reality he has been working toward peace to show people we are partners in the world and the U.S. is not the almighty dictator looking down on the rest of the world as if they are inferior.

So, while President Obama was “humbled” by this honor, it appears right wingers are outraged.

The hate, coming from Republicans, starts right at the top with the Republican National Committee which issued this hate-soaked statement:

The real question Americans are asking is, “What has President Obama actually accomplished?” It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain — President Obama won’t be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.

Typical hate coming from an RNC that was asleep at the wheel when the worldwide reputation of the United States of America was going on the toilet under President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

The statement shows that the Michael Steele National Committee, excuse me … RNC, is sticking to failed tactics from a failed presidential campaign (whining about Barack Obama’s so-called star power).

But, wait, it gets better when you check out this blog post from right-wing nut Erick Erickson, of the National Review, who subtly adds what some would consider a racial element to this mix:

I did not realize the Nobel Peace Prize had an affirmative action quota for, but that is the only thing I can think of for this news.

Translation: Here is another unqualified black person winning something that should have gone to a white person … it has to be affirmative action.

Erickson slips in the customary shots at President Jimmy Carter and President Bill Clinton, too.

President Obama is working to bring other nations to the table of diplomacy so many in the worldwide community feel invested in the destiny of the world and not at the mercy of the U.S.

From the New York Times:

Mr. Obama’s foreign policy has been criticized bitterly among neoconservatives like former Vice President Dick Cheney, who have suggested his rhetoric is naïve and his inclination to talk to America’s enemies will leave the United States vulnerable to another terrorist attack.

In its announcement of the prize, the Nobel Committee seemed to directly refute that line of thinking.

“Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics,” the committee wrote. “Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play.”

Congratulations President Obama, but there is a LOT of work ahead. This is no time to rest.

Glenn Beck Finds A Black Person To Trash President Obama, Other Blacks … How Convenient

It’s always interesting to me how, on Fox News, there seems to be an inordinate number of people of color who are all too willing “ho” themselves out to trash other black people when people like Glenn Beck stand back and keep their hands squeaky clean. I bring this up in response to a rather intriguing entry on Media Matters for America’s Web site about a black woman who was speaking during a discussion led by Beck (who rarely misses out on opportunities to take cheap shots at people of color, but most notably black people).

This show was about what concerns “average Americans.”

If these individuals represent average Americans then that is a sad commentary. Thankfully they do not.

Anyway, here is an excerpt of what Media Matters had:

One of Beck’s guests, an African-American woman named Mary Baker, stated her belief that “in this time in our nation, we should be together,” before lamenting that, “It seems like we’re being so torn apart.” …

Regarding Ms. Baker, she is the author of a recently published editorial entitled, “Why I am no longer an African American,” a piece she mentioned on Beck’s program. The article argues that Obama’s election “has resulted in even more racial division” and that we are witnessing a resurgence of “anti-American sentiments” stemming form “the Black Power Movement, Nation of Islam, or the Black Nationalist Movement.” “The classification of me as an African American,” Ms. Baker writes, “says that although I live in America, my loyalty and allegiance are to Africa.”

Ms. Baker concludes her piece with the following argument:

Is this division amongst us perpetrated by our very own government? It is obvious that the inspiration for the classification of African American has nothing to do with those born of African descent. It is a radical group of Black Americans who hold to the anti-American views of those shared by Jeremiah Wright, Professor Gates, Jesse Jackson, President Obama and many others who came out of the radical Civil Rights Movement.

Promoting the idea that Obama’s election has turned black radicalism and nationalism into the official policies of the United States government is an explicit goal of the current conservative media movement. Stoking racial tensions is clearly a goal as well. And, as usual, the blame is fixed exactly 180 degrees away from where it should be. The promotion of such beliefs is not the work of the White House or MSNBC. Rather, it is Beck who is hyping the specter of race-based policies by invoking the theme of “reparations,” and it was media conservatives who called the president and his first Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, racists. By contrast, it was President Obama who, during his first national speech in 2004, stated plainly and unequivocally, “We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.”

How convenient this black woman named Mary Baker just happened to end up on this show of Glenn Beck’s. It’s a stunning coincidence this conservative black woman comes on to trash all these black people.

If she says she is no longer an African American then I say, “Don’t let the door hit ya where the lord split ya.”

The “radical Civil Rights Movement” she says.

So, civil rights is now a radical concept? The Civil Rights Movement was radical at its time, but for someone to say they see it that way nowadays is beyond disturbing (it’s Uncle Ruckus like … in reference to the self-hating character from the cartoon Boondocks).

Do we seriously have a female Jesse Lee Peterson?

It’s amazing the lives that were lost during the Civil Rights Movement so that people like this could have the right to say the kind of Jesse Lee Peterson-type garbage she is writing. It’s only appropriate she would end up on a show like this with Beck leading the way.

Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909290030

Sarah Palin Goes Overseas To Bash President Obama, America

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a former candidate for the vice presidency, has gone overseas to Hong Kong to attack our United States of America president, Barack Obama. But, Palin apparently repulsed some U.S. delegates so much that they walked out and commented, but refused to be identified so (apparently) as to not be linked to the new conservative hero. Palin turning people off is nothing new, but her going overseas to attack our president does speak to the kind of person she is and continues to become as the spotlight is attracted to her. It wasn’t that long ago that Americans who were criticizing a president were considered anti-American and thought of as being haters of America.

Here is an excerpt from the Huffington Post story:

HONG KONG — Former U.S. vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, criticized for her lack of foreign policy experience, emerged in Asia on Wednesday to share her views from “Main Street U.S.A.” with a group of high-flying global investors.

In her first trip to the region, the former Alaska governor addressed an annual conference of investors in Hong Kong in what was billed as a wide-ranging talk about governance, economics and U.S. and Asian affairs.

Two US delegates left early, according to AFP, with one saying “it was awful, we couldn’t stand it any longer.” He declined to be identified.

“I’m going to call it like I see it and I will share with you candidly a view right from Main Street, Main Street U.S.A.,” Palin told a room full of asset managers and other finance professionals, according to a video of part of the speech obtained by The Associated Press. “And how perhaps my view of Main Street … how that affects you and your business.”

Palin spoke out against government intervention in the economy. “We got into this mess because of government interference in the first place,” Palin said, according to the Wall Street Journal. “We’re not interested in government fixes, we’re interested in freedom,” she added.

In what could be considered a paid attack, it seems Palin might have been paid for her speech to go to another area of the world to attack the President of the United States of America.

I wonder if conservatives will be attacking Palin for going over and using this platform to engage in partisan politics, attack the president and bring negativity to the U.S. before its worldwide neighbors.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/palin-hong-kong-speech-im_n_295812.html

President Carter Has Harsh Words About Rep. Wilson, Tone Toward President Obama

Only Fox News would accuse President Jimmy Carter of playing the race card while (on a daily basis turning blind eyes and deaf ears to Rush Limbaugh’s almost daily racial rants).

Carter, the former president of the United States, had some harsh words related to Rep. Joe Wilson’s angry, hate-driven and irresponsible outburst during President Obama’s speech before a joint session of Congress. Fox News, as you might expect, had a headline on its homepage that charged Carter with playing the mythical so-called “race card” with his comments about Rep. Wilson (Fox News links to an AP story with a more fair and balanced headline to describe the story, “Carter: Wilson’s Outburst ‘Based on Racism’”).

Here is a portion of the AP story Fox News posted:

ATLANTA – Former President Jimmy Carter said Tuesday that U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst to President Barack Obama during a speech to Congress last week was an act “based on racism” and rooted in fears of a black president.

“I think it’s based on racism,” Carter said in response to an audience question at a town hall held at his presidential center in Atlanta. “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president.”

The Georgia Democrat said the outburst was a part of a disturbing trend directed at the president that has included demonstrators equating Obama to Nazi leaders.

“Those kind of things are not just casual outcomes of a sincere debate on whether we should have a national program on health care,” he said. “It’s deeper than that.”

Wilson, a South Carolina Republican, was formally rebuked Tuesday in a House vote for shouting “You lie!” during Obama’s speech to Congress last Wednesday.

The shout came after the president commented that illegal aliens would be ineligible for federal subsidies to buy health insurance. Republicans expressed their disbelief with sounds of disapproval, punctuated by Wilson’s outburst.

I am not sure Rep. Wilson’s undisciplined and out-of-control outburst is directly based in racism (although he does have a bit of a checkered past relative to issues regarding race). But, I think it is based on a strong lack of respect for this particular president (the reason for that lack of respect is certainly up for debate), who merely is making proposals for healthcare. Rep. Wilson’s anger seems disproportionate to the kind of legislation that President Obama is simply proposing (as little if anything is actually set in stone). So, I think President Carter may be a bit off base with Rep. Wilson, specifically, but in general I think he is on the money with some of the more outspoken people on the far right as far as their motives are concerned.

This also is from the story:

“I think Joe’s conduct was asinine, but I think it would be asinine no matter what the color of the president,” said Dick Harpootlian, who has known Wilson for decades. “I don’t think Joe’s outburst was caused by President Obama being African-American. I think it was caused by no filter being between his brain and his mouth.”

Harpootlian said he received scores of racial e-mails from outside South Carolina after he talked about the vote on FOX News.

“You have a bunch of folks out there looking for some comfort in their racial issues. They have a problem with an African-American president,” he said. “But was he motivated by that? I don’t think so. I respectfully disagree with President Carter, though it gives validity to racism.”

I think that is more the issue: Rep. Wilson’s outburst emboldens the racists and far-right nuts who hated (or at the very least were uncomfortable with) Barack Obama the first time they saw him (long before anything came out of his mouth).

Rep. Wilson’s thoughts have inspired the haters and racists. Moreover, Rep. Wilson’s unwillingness to formally apologize for his disgraceful actions before Congress makes me think two things: 1. He is not really sorry for his actions. 2. He now is officially playing politics (by forcing primarily Democrats to reprimand him). 3. He is willing to be a martyr for those who hate President Obama.

Rob Miller Has Raised Reportedly $500,000 Since Rep. Wilson’s Uncivilized ‘You Lie’ Comment During President Obama’s Speech

Rob Miller, a democrat who is running against the disgraced Rep. Joe Wilson, has been raising quite a bit of money since Wilson’s “you lie” outburst during President Obama’s speech before Congress this week.

From Talking Points Memo:

The money is still coming in for Iraq War veteran Rob Miller, the Democratic House candidate who has received a flood of donations since incumbent Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) shouted “You lie!” during President Obama’s speech last night.

The DCCC just announced that in the time since the Wilson outburst, Miller has received more than $500,000, from over 14,000 individual contributors.

I’d have to think Miller (or just about anyone else) would be a better representative than the undisciplined Joe Wilson, who doesn’t seem quite as sincere since giving the customary apology after doing something stupid and something as disgraceful and disrespectful as he did.