It is with the greatest regret, on behalf of our Board, that we must announce that Air America Media is ceasing its live programming operations as of this afternoon

via Michelle Malkin » Lib talk radio flops again: Air America goes bankrupt.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Matthews on West Point: Obama went to the “enemy camp” tonight, didn’t he?.

Public Trust in Media Accuracy & Fairness Plunges, Liberal v Conservative Bias Gap at 28 Points | NewsBusters.org.

I guess it doesn’t help that Washington Post.com gives massive 9-12 rally a tiny link

It also might have something to do with running a story calling the marchers a bunch of  uninformed racists, yet not backing up the charge

But probably it has more to do with the fact that they want to carry Obama’s water and not worry about how ridiculous they look

The president pushes back against health care misinformation, then spreads a bunch of his own.

via Obama’s Lies Matter, Too: The president pushes back against health care misinformation, then spreads a bunch of his own. – Reason Magazine.

Salon Editor in Chief Joan Walsh could barely contain herself at this nearly Snoop Doggesque display. “‘We will call you out’ on lies,” she Tweeted. “love it!”

It is telling that so many people who claim to be speaking on the side of Truth, Justice, and the American Way of Journalism have consistently focused their outrage-o-meters at individual townhall attendees, political broadcast entertainers, and the lesser lights of a lame (if resurgent-by-default) opposition party, while letting walk nearly fact-check-free the non-irrelevant occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If calling out lies and misrepresentations about a significant policy proposal is such pressing journalistic business—and it should be!—you’d think the watchdogs might start with the guy doing the proposing.

The lies last night began in Obama’s opening paragraph. “When I spoke here last winter,” he began, “credit was frozen. And our financial system was on the verge of collapse.” In fact, Obama spoke on Feb. 24, at least six weeks after credit markets began to thaw, and one week after he proclaimed that the passage of his $787 billion stimulus marked “the beginning of the end, the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans.” Obama’s speech that day wasn’t about staving off a collapse, it was about cleaning up the mess and tackling long-ignored issues. Such as health care.

It’s never encouraging when a politician who desperately needs to convince skeptical Americans of his fiscal sobriety starts off by slurring his words. As you might then infer, Obama was just warming up. “Insurance companies,” the president announced, “will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies,” in part because such prevention “saves money.” Looks like someone forgot to tell the Congressional Budget Office, or other non-White House sources that have analyzed the cost-benefit of prevention.

Again and again last night, the president’s numbers didn’t add up. “There may be those—particularly the young and healthy—who still want to take the risk and go without coverage,” he warned, in a passage defending compulsory insurance. “The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits.” No, it means that, on balance, the healthy young don’t pay for the unhealthy old. The whole point of forcing vigorous youth to buy insurance is using their cash and good actuarials to bring down the costs of covering the less fortunate.

Such fudges reveal a politician who, for whatever reason, feels like he can’t be honest about the real-world costs of expanding health care. “Add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years,” he said, trying hard to sound like those numbers weren’t pulled out of Joe Biden’s pants, and won’t be dwarfed by actual costs within a year or two. “We’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system–a system that is currently full of waste and abuse,” he said, making him at least the eighth consecutive president to vaguely promise cutting Medicare “waste” (a promise, it should be added, that could theoretically be fulfilled without drastically overhauling the health care system). Any government-run “public option,” he claimed, somehow “won’t be” subsidized by taxpayers, but instead would “be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.”

And in a critical, tic-riddled passage that many of even his most ardent supporters probably don’t believe, Obama said: “Here’s what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits–either now or in the future. Period.” In case you couldn’t quite read his lips, the president repeated the line for emphasis. Then: “And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize.”

If that “one dime” formulation sounds familiar, that’s because Obama made—then almost immediately broke—the same promise regarding taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000 a year. Surely the no-new-deficits pledge is headed for the campaign dustbin faster even then that “net spending cut” we’ll never see.

Such bending of the truth-curve matters, I daresay even more than the pressing issue of Marc Ambinder’s “umpiric objections” to having the media take a former Republican vice presidential candidate seriously as a health policy commentator. Aside from the disturbing—if-predictable aspect of a commander in chief falling far short of telling the whole truth, there are practical impacts of presidential prevarications that should worry even those who’d rather live in China than in an America without universal coverage.

As the reform supporter and professional skeptic Mickey Kaus noted before the speech, “Obama doesn’t need to get ‘Republicans on board.’ He doesn’t need to get Blue Dog Democrats on board. He needs to get voters on board.” And if there’s any tactic less effective at wooing skeptics than number-fudging insincerity, it’s number-fudging insincerity coupled with attacks on the veracity, motivation, and worldview of the skeptics themselves.

Again last night, Obama invoked the boogeyman of “special interests” who “lie” in order “to keep things exactly the way they are,” despite the fact that the special interests in this case are lining up to support the president, and that the critics of his plan tend to bemoan, not defend, the status quo. Opponents of his plan, he said, were “ideological”; Ted Kennedy’s support for health care reform, meanwhile, “was born not of some rigid ideology, but of his own experience.” Obama said his door was “always open” to those bringing “a serious set of proposals,” and he slammed that door shut on any attempts to break the almost universally unloved link between employment and insurance. He yearned to “replace acrimony with civility,” then got Democrats stomping on their feet with attacks against the Iraq War and “tax breaks for the wealthy.” The center of the debate, as always, was wherever he chose to stand.

And above all else, Obama chose to shadowbox against the more extreme claims of the Sarah Palins of the world, rather than engage the most serious of the skeptics’ arguments. No, the administration doesn’t “plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens,” but what about the possibility of government cost-cutters frowning upon expensive hip replacement surgeries for the chronically old? No, the proposal doesn’t amount to a complete “government takeover” of health care, but it does continue to expand the government’s role (and, promises aside, expenses) in ways that make a deficit-whiplashed nation nervous. No, “no one would be forced to choose” a public option, but what about the argument that incentives would eventually push Americans from private insurance to the public plan?

The result of this challenge-dodging counterpunch was a speech that pleased Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, but I doubt will sway the many Americans who are both on the fence and off Sarah Palin’s e-mail list.

There was one line in the speech last night that pointed to an alternative, more promising future: “My guiding principle,” Obama said, “is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition.” Unfortunately, the president evinces zero understanding of how increased regulation can reduce consumer choice, even or especially when the government joins the competition. And even if he did see the connection, we’d have good reason to suspect that he wouldn’t talk about it openly with the American people. That, ultimately, worries me more than a senior citizen who wants to keep the government out of Medicare.

White House source: We never asked Van Jones to fill out the vetting questionnaire Update: FBI vetted Jones

According to a WH source:

An administration official said special advisers to the president, or czars, are not required to fill out the questionnaire that runs 7 pages and contains 63 questions.

The entire questionnaire, the official said, is reserved for appointees who must win Senate confirmation…

Question 61 reads as follows: “Have you had any association with any person, group or business venture that could be used – even unfairly – to impugn or attack your character and qualifications for government service?”…

An administration official said Jones never hid his controversial associations or remarks from the White House.

“It wouldn’t be fair to characterize him as being dishonest or hiding his comments or his positions,” the official said. “It’s just fair to say that he didn’t go through the most rigorous vetting process.”

A former Bush lawyer who spoke to Politico isn’t buying it:

During the Bush Administration any White House staffer with policymaking or public responsibilities would have undergone substantial vetting. At a minimum, the potential hire would have been asked the umbrella question “is there anything in your background that — fairly or unfairly — might be used to cause embarrasment to you or the President.” In, addition, anyone with a West Wing office had to undergo a national security background investigation based on the SF-86 form in order to get a permanent badge. That form includes very detailed questions about associations with anti-government groups. If Jones was asked either set of questions, the information that led to his resignation should have been disclosed…

Van Jones’ issues would probably have been flagged if he had simply been looking for a date on E-Harmony or Match.Com. Here, there was most likely a major gap in the vetting operation, a deliberate deception by Jones, or a conscious decision by someone senior to short circuit the more rigorous vetting process. The smart money would be on the latter two possibilities. This happened once in the Bush Administration with the vetting of Bernie Kerik, with awful consequences.

SF Gate:

Jones resigned amid a furor over his signature on a 2004 petition questioning the government’s actions around the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Supporters say the administration surely knew his background when they appointed Jones, the first African American to write a best-selling environmental book, as special adviser for green jobs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality. In fact, agents interviewed at least one of his former supervisors in San Francisco – Eva Paterson – when the FBI vetted his appointment.

As Allahpundit states:

Jones’s association with STORM should have been a, er, red flag — enough of one, at least, to warrant completing the full seven-page questionnaire. Again, why the free pass?

“Meet the Press” finds the big lesson in the Van Jones story: You can’t trust the Internet

Super Van? WaPo Describes Van Jones as ‘Legendary’ and ‘Towering’ Figure of Environmental Movement

Oh, My: MSNBC Carefully Crops Shot of Black Man Carrying AR-15 at Healt Care Rally to Avoid Skin Color, So They Can Then Rant and Rave About “White People” Showing Up With Guns When a “Person of Color” is President.

Per Ace:

Here’s the video before the careful cropping. Which, you know, would have taken less care and effort to run. Cropping and repeating that one almost-still image took more time and effort than just running the real news.

Allah is outraged, as is the Newsbusters

The best part about it is the fact that this tool thinks Rachel’s debut went well on Meet The Press

When Armey said he took no responsibility “whatsoever” for the virulent protests against President Obama and compared it to MoveOn.org running an ad comparing President Bush to Hitler, Maddow pointed out that that never actually happened. Later she elaborated, pointing out that major conservative groups had speakers going around the country comparing Obama to Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin and asking supporters to put the fear of God in their congresspeople. When Armey said that he denounced violence, Maddow pointed out that his organization, FreedomWorks, was in a coalition whose website was promoting the violent fight at a Tampa town hall as a good thing.

Via Freedom Works, here is the ad that MoveOn made

As for the threats? Again, another lie

Washington, DC — Today, FreedomWorks released an apology to leftist political organizations, including MoveOn.org, the Democratic National Committee, the AFL-CIO, and ACORN for our apparent ignorance of the fine art of political discourse.

FreedomWorks’ August Recess Call to Action encouraged grassroots citizens to attend Congressional town hall meetings and listening sessions.  We asked everyone to voice their opinions and communicate their opposition to the President’s proposed hostile takeover of the American health care system.  Apparently, the very act of showing up and having an opinion is, in effect, to act like a “thug.”  Opposing President Obama’s policy agenda on health care is, in and of itself, unacceptable, and has no place in our democracy.  Bottom line: it’s “disgusting,” according to our friends on the left.

We didn’t know this.  Evidently, we also didn’t know best practices in a respectful, dignified policy debate, but our leftist friends were kind enough to “take FreedomWorks to school”, so to speak.

Specifically, “school” included phone call blitzes from MoveOn.org and the AFL-CIO that jammed FreedomWorks phone lines and filled up staff voice mail boxes.  Callers’ consistently used profanity, vulgarity, ever-popular references to “Nazis” and “brown-shirters,” racial slurs targeting an African-American staffer, and even veiled threats of violence and bodily harm.

Now we know how an intelligent political debate unfolds.  Thank You!

FreedomWorks would like to share some of the more interesting examples of this brand of debate, graciously communicated to staff via voice mail by some of the more learned members of the thoughtful left.

Please click on the links below (WARNING:  If you, like the uninformed members of FreedomWorks, do not have an appropriately sophisticated and  “progressive” view of political discourse, you may find the content of these recordings extremely offensive. They use profanity, crude sexual innuendo, racist remarks, and very, very bad English):

Call 1: “You’re a total d**khead. Bye-bye, you little a**hole.”

Call 2: “You all suffer from the same f**king problem: you didn’t get laid enough when you were younger because you’re 5’ 3”. … Girls never paid any attention to you… You’re a little f**king dweeb who f**king didn’t get any p**** his whole f**king life… You’re a little f**king piece of shit and I would f**king step on  your fu**king head quicker than you could shake a stick out, if I had the chance… You’re the f**king minority.”

Call 3: We are using tactics like Hitler to disrupt democracy. “If I have to pick up a weapon…then I will.”

Call 4: Heavy breather.

Call 5: “F**king buddies’ wives…”

Call 6: Very creepy: “Stop disrupting my democracy with Nazi, Brownshirt tactics…you immoral bast****.”

Call 7: Threat to respond violently to town hall attendees. “I hope this backfires on that piece of s*** Dick Armey.”

Call 8: “I hope you have a hard time sleeping at night.”

Call 9: “You are almost as bad as the communists… You’re from out of the country, obviously.”

Call 10: “Your Brownshirt tactics are unacceptable, un-American.”

Where did the lie start:

I do recall is this:

White House to Dems on town halls: “If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard”

Top White House aides gave Senate Democrats a recess battle plan on Thursday, arming the lawmakers with tips for avoiding disastrous town hall meetings while showing them polling on popular aspects of the reform effort…

They showed video clips of the confrontational town halls that have dominated the media coverage, and told senators to do more prep work than usual for their public meetings by making sure their own supporters turn out, senators and aides said.

And they screened TV ads and reviewed the various campaigns by critics of the Democratic plan.

“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting…

“They are just helping us understand the fringe that is trying to mess up our meetings,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Just a reminder of what network Rachel works for:

UPDATE 1: All aboard the Astroturf bus!

Chris Gautz of the Jackson (MI) Citizen Patriot reports that the SEIU and Organizing For America chartered buses from nearly 200 miles away to plant Obamacare supporters at a town hall meeting held by Democrat Rep. Mark Schauer.

All aboard the Astroturf bus

UPDATE 2: SEIU Watch: Obama to rouse Purple Army in special conference call

I’m getting on a call with President Obama tomorrow and I want you to join me.

The President is holding a live health care reform strategy meeting on Thursday at 2:30 pm EST. He’ll lay out our strategy and message going forward, and he’ll answer questions from SEIU activists and supporters like you.

Click here to RSVP and submit a question for President Obama: http://my.barackobama.com/forum

It’s impossible for me to tell you in an email how proud I am of the work SEIU members and health care activists are doing to advance real health reform. Everywhere Congress goes, we’re there to meet them. It’s driving our opponents crazy; I think that means we’re doing something right.

Join tomorrow’s call with the President and keep the momentum going: http://my.barackobama.com/forum

In a few weeks, Congress goes back to Washington and the final push for a health reform bill will be underway. Now, more than ever, we’ve got to be on the same page to create real change in the health care system for working families across the country.

I hope you’ll join the President and me tomorrow as we discuss how we’re going to get it done: http://my.barackobama.com/forum

Thanks,
Andy Stern

more…

The Purple Shirts are loading the buses to get to a congressional town hall near you.

And never forget Andy Stern’s organizing philosophy:

Asked about his organizing philosophy, Andy Stern summed it up this way: “[W]e prefer to use the power of persuasion, but if that doesn’t work we use the persuasion of power.”

Powerful PR Firm Helps Campaign to Get Glenn Beck Off The Air | NewsBusters.org.

Read Noel’s post and email it to everyone in your address book!

Let GEICO know your thoughts as well

Michelle Malkin » NBC: “YES WE DID”.

Ideologically invested. Financially invested. In the tank.