Conservative Radio Host Attacks Iraq War Veteran

Via ThinkProgress.com…

Right-Winger Accuses Iraq Vet Of ‘Stabbing’ His ‘Fellow Men And Women In Uniform’ In The Back

During a debate on MSNBC’s Hardball this evening, retired Air Force Lt. Colonel Robert “Buzz” Patterson, a right-wing radio host, gratuitously attacked Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz, the chairman of VoteVets.org, exclaiming “I am so happy you’re not serving in Iraq right now, stabbing your fellow men and women in uniform like you do back in the states.”

Patterson claimed that Soltz didn’t know what he was talking about because he “didn’t get the memo” that “we’re fighting al Qaeda in Iraq.” “You know what, I don’t need the memo because I was in Iraq,” responded Soltz. “You read the newspaper, I was in Iraq. That’s the difference between you and I.”

Patterson muttered back that he had “been to Iraq too,” but Soltz laughed at his claim. “Are you talking about your rah-rah-sis-kum-bah cheerleader tours that the White House took you on or are you talking about as a soldier who took the country?”

Make sure to watch the video.

John McCain, the “War Candidate,” on the Daily Show

Just one more illustration of the huge brass-ones that Jon Stewart swings: Jon interviews the war candidate, John McCain — via CrooksandLiars.com.

McCain got very angry that Stewart called them out for using the “you’re not supporting the troops,” theme and was trying to filibuster the segment… He tried to use the troops as a wedge. Stewart got hot and fought back… McCain started to stutter. (rough transcript)

Stewart: All I’m saying is you cannot look a soldier in the eye and say questioning the president is less supportive to you than extending your tour for three months when you should be coming home to your family.

McCain: Every American…

Stewart: And that’s not fair to put on people that criticize…

McCain: Jon…

Stewart: And you know I love you and respect your service and would never question any of that—this is not about questioning the troops and their ability to fight and their ability to be supported. And that is what the administration does and that is almost criminal.

UPDATE: Video courtesy of Comedy Central.

Real Family Values

Americans Support Edwards Choice

Americans by 2 to 1 margin support the decision of John Edwards to stay in the Democratic presidential race even though his wife, Elizabeth, has been diagnosed with a recurrence of breast cancer, according to a new USA Today/Gallup Poll.

Edwards also “got a boost in the horserace of Democratic contenders, chosen as the preference by 14% of the respondents who are Democrats or lean toward the Democratic party. That’s up from 9% in the USA Today poll taken three weeks ago.”

The national poll had Clinton at 35%, with Sen. Barack Obama at 22%, Al Gore at 17% and John Edwards at 14%.

F(au)x News: PR Arm of the GOP

Here’s enough reason for Democrats not to trust Fox News, and to correctly describe it as an extension of the republican party:

Journalists strive to report the news, not to be the news. So Fox News should have been a bit embarrassed to headline a story that ended with the Nevada Democratic Party canceling Fox’s sponsorship of a pre-caucus debate.

Then again, Fox is not a typical news organization. [...] Fox’s prime commitment is to the triumph of conservative politics, not to a well-informed public. From hiring hosts to selecting stories to framing questions for discussion, Fox demonstrates its dedication to advancing the ideological interests of the right.

As former Fox reporter/anchor Jon Du Pre put it in the documentary “Outfoxed,” “We weren’t necessarily, as it was told to us, a newsgathering organization so much as we were a proponent of a point of view … we were there to reinforce a constituency.”

[...]

What evidence, forged or otherwise, did Fox rely on in asserting that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) attended a Muslim madrassah? If CNN could go to the school and give the lie to the report, why couldn’t Fox? What outside panel was empowered to investigate how Fox could have aired such an outrageously inaccurate report? Who was fired for the inflammatory falsehoods?

A study by a University of Maryland center concluded, “Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions” about Iraq. For example, in 2003, 67 percent of those who relied primarily on Fox wrongly believed the U.S. “found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization.” Only 40 percent of those who relied on print media harbored this illusion, debunked thoroughly by the 9/11 Commission.

Instead of providing “fair and balanced” reporting, Fox has created an audience ignorant of the facts, but fully supportive of management’s ideology.

An audience that decides for itself, based on “fair and balanced” coverage, ought not to reach monolithic conclusions. Yet, in our 2004 polling with Media Vote, using Nielsen diaries, we found that Fox News viewers supported George Bush over John Kerry by 88 percent to 7 percent. No demographic segment, other than Republicans, was as united in supporting Bush. Conservatives, white evangelical Christians, gun owners, and supporters of the Iraq war all gave Bush fewer votes than did regular Fox News viewers.

Rove in the Middle of Latest Bush Scandal

When will the long national nightmare that republicans and the Bush administration have wrought be over? It is now clear that Karl Rove, Bush’s closest political advisor, is right in the middle of the latest Bush White House scandal:

"New emails show conclusively that Karl Rove was in the middle of this mess from the beginning. It is now imperative that he testify before Congress and give all the details of his involvement both in the proposal to fire the 93 U.S. Attorneys in the beginning of George Bush’s second term, and his involvement in the firing of the individual eight U.S. Attorneys who were fired throughout 2006.  If the White House prevents Karl Rove from testifying, it will be thumbing its nose at the American people and at the rule of law. The reason it’s so imperative that people testify under oath is that every time new information comes out, it proves that the White House was not telling the truth in their previous statements. Statements from those involved have proved to be false, false, false, time after time after time."

-U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer

You can see one of the emails incriminating Rove here.