Motor City Liberal

Random Friday:President Obama discusses College Affordability in Michigan

2012-01-27T21:18:00.001-05:00

Motor City Liberal Comment: Harass the Republican trolls.

Fox Moderator Chris Wallace: Debates Are "Stupid," Shun Policy Issues

2012-01-27T21:16:00.000-05:00

by Eric Hananoki/Media Matters

Though Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace has moderated four Republican debates, that doesn't mean he has a very high opinion of their value to voters. During an interview on today's The Mike Gallagher Show, Wallace denounced the nineteen debates as "stupid" and unnecessary.

"Let's really get serious. It is ridiculous how many debates there have been," Wallace began. "This is the nineteenth debate. It is insane that there have been nineteen debates."

Wallace admitted that journalists gravitate toward questions about political horse racing at the expense of policy issues because policy questions "have been asked to death" and don't get as much headlines.

"I was a moderator on the panel of four of these debates, and they have been asked to death, 'What are you going -- What would you do to get the country working again? What would you do about Iran and the bomb? What would you do on immigration?" Wallace said.

"You're asked -- it's been asked, and answered, over and over again, so what you find yourself going to, because, one, it's new, and two, quite frankly, it'll make news, is, 'They've been saying terrible things about each other, their campaigns have been saying terrible things about each other on the trail, let's get them into a fight.'"

Wallace added: "Come on, if you were in that situation, would you really say, 'Well, tell me your tax policy?' I'm not saying it's a great moment in journalism, but on the other hand, they have been asked about almost everything a million times."

Wallace continued his criticism later, calling debates "stupid" and akin to "a car race. You really want to see if there's going to be a wreck or something like that." Wallace concluded, "They shouldn't be having these debates in the first place."

Wallace isn't alone in his feelings about the frequency of the debates. A former RNC chairman toldPolitico that the number of debates has gotten "out of hand" and Karl Rove recently wrote that "[d]ebates have nearly crippled campaigns." Conversely, The Huffington Post's Michael Calderonereported that CNN's Sam Feist and John King both "argue that numerous debates have been good for democracy."

Wallace's feelings aside, Fox News executives have used the debates as a way to highlight the purported difference between their "straight news" and opinion divisions. Fox News recently gave The New York Times -- a frequent recipient of the network's attacks -- access to its preparation for its last debate.

GOP hurting their own brand?

2012-01-27T21:12:00.001-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Michigan news round up

2012-01-27T21:06:00.003-05:00

Electablog covers President Obama visit to Michigan

It seems the people of Troy want to get rid of Tea bag mayor

Sources say Ron Paul signed off on racist newsletters

2012-01-27T20:54:00.000-05:00

By Muriel Kane/Raw Story

Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has consistently denied having written — or even read — the inflammatory racist and anti-gay remarks that went out under his name in newsletters he published in the early 1990s. Although numerous associates agree that Paul does not hold racist views, however, it appears that he may have known more about the racist articles than he has been willing to admit.

The Washington Post reported on Friday that three people with first-hand knowledge of Paul’s operations say “he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.”

“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. … He would proof it,’’ former company secretary Renae Hathway told the Post.

According to these sources, the main author of the racist passages was Lew Rockwell, who was then the vice president of Paul’s company.

The Post also details how closely entangled Paul’s political career, his business ventures, and members of his own family were during those years. According to one source, who chose to remain anonymous, Paul and his associates made a deliberate choice in the late 1980s to increase sales of the newsletter by making it more provocative.

“It was playing on a growing racial tension, economic tension, fear of government,’’ the source stated “I’m not saying Ron believed this stuff. It was good copy. Ron Paul is a shrewd businessman.’’

Cato Institute President Ed Crane, who frequently lunched with Paul during this period, similarly told the paper that when the two of them discussed how to increase the circulation of Paul’s newsletters, they agreed that “people who have extreme views” were most likely to respond. Paul told Crane his best response had come when he used a mailing list from the racist and anti-Semitic newspaper, Spotlight.

If that was the strategy, it apparently worked. According to the Post, political disclosure forms show that between 1984 and 1995, Paul went from being up to $765,000 in debt to having a net worth of up to $3.3 million.

A Paul spokesperson contacted by the Post for comment expressed doubt about the assertions made by Crane and the other sources.

GOP Presidential Candidates Tell Florida Uninsured Woman: You’re On Your Own

2012-01-27T20:48:00.001-05:00

By Igor Volsky/Think Progress

At last night’s CNN presidential debate in Jacksonville, Florida, the GOP candidates told an unemployed woman in need of health insurance that they would repeal the health reform law that could help her find coverage and giver her a tax deduction to go out and find her own insurance.

The woman — Lynn Frazier — said she found herself “unemployed for the first time in 10 years and unable to afford health benefits.” Under the Affordable Care Act, Frazier may qualify for temporary insurance in the state’s high-risk pool, which already provides coverage for 3,285 Floridianswho can’t find affordable coverage elsewhere. In two years, she’ll be able to pick out a health policy through the state’s Exchange. All private insurers will offer a comprehensive basic set of benefits and allow consumers like Frazier to compare and contrast different plans to find the coverage that works best for them and their family. Insurers won’t be able to deny insurance based on past illness or rescind coverage unexpectedly, as they often do in today’s health market, and Frazier will pay a “community” rate and may even qualify for tax credits to help her afford her premiums and out of pocket cost-sharing expenses.

The Republican candidates pledged to undo these benefits and instead encouraged her to find coverage “as an individual” — on her own — with the help of a government tax deduction:

– RON PAUL: And you should have an opportunity — medical care insurance should be given to you as an individual, so if you’re employed or not employed, you have — you just take care of that and you keep it up.

– NEWT GINGRICH: She ought to get the same tax break whether she buys personally or whether she buys through a economy. She should also be able to buy into an association so that she’s buying with lots of other people so it’s not single insurance, which is the most expensive kind.

– MITT ROMNEY: What we should do is allow individuals to own their own insurance and have the same tax treatment as companies get. You do that and people like this young woman would be able to own her insurance. The rates would be substantial lower for her buying it individually than if she had to buy it individually today.

– RICK SANTORUM: All three of these folks sound great and I agree with them. I would just add that health savings account, which I introduced 20 years ago with John Kasich, is really the fundamental reform of getting consumers back involved in the health care system.

Watch the exchange:

In reality, sending off Americans to face health care insurers on their own without first reforming the individual health care market — so that companies can no longer deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions, rescind insurance, or charge sicker and older people substantially more — is an inadequate solution that will do little to lower the number of uninsured or reduce health care costs.

Since insurers are hoping to attract the most profitable beneficiaries, individual plans offer “coverage so riddled with loopholes, limits, exclusions, and gotchas that it won’t come close to covering their expenses if they fall seriously ill.” As a Consumer Reports investigationconcluded, individual insurance policies are “more costly than the equivalent job-based coverage, and for those in less-than-perfect health, unaffordable at best and unavailable at worst.” The lack of effective consumer protections in most states also allows insurers to trick consumers by selling plans with “affordable” premiums “whose skimpy coverage can leave people who get very sick with the added burden of ruinous medical debt.”

Thus, if an individual falls ill under the GOP’s proposal, the cost of the medical episode and the inadequate insurance will outweigh any beneficial tax treatment and deplete any health savings account they may have.

VIDEO: The GOP’s Racial Politics

2012-01-27T20:40:00.000-05:00

by former Rep. Tom Perriello/think progress

From the subtle to the sickening, this Republican primary season has seen a normalizing of racist and racially-coded language. It was not so long ago that the chairman of the Republican National Committee apologized for his party’s history of “trying to benefit politically from racial polarization,” and told the NAACP, “I am here today as the Republican Chairman to tell you we were wrong.” Such leadership cannot be found now.

Newt Gingrich may be the new master of race politics with his efforts to label Barack Obama the “food-stamp president” and his generous offer to lecture African-Americans at the NAACP on why they should demand paychecks instead of food stamps. We know that Mr. Gingrich’s claims of being a “historian” for Freddie and Fannie are a strain, but would it be that hard for him to check the history of NAACP’s leadership on developing and demanding groundbreaking job creation policies? (Or to note that more food stamp recipients are white than any other race or ethnicity?) But why would a historian let facts get in the way of historical racial prejudice?

ThinkProgress’ Jeff Spross has compiled a recent history of the GOP’s dehumanizing and divisive language that threatens to plague the primary process for weeks to come. Watch it:

Romney’s ‘Blind Trust’ Was Not Very Blind

2012-01-27T20:34:00.000-05:00

By Josh Israel/Think

ThinkProgress reported earlier this week that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) profited from thousands of Florida foreclosures through a Goldman Sachs investment fund.

When pressed on this by his rival, Newt Gingrich, in last night’s Republican debate, Romney disclaimed any responsibility for or knowledge of his own investments:

ROMNEY: First of all, my investments are not made by me. My investments for the last 10 years have been in a blind trust, managed by a trustee. Secondly, the investments they’ve made, we’ve learned about this as we made our financial disclosure, have been made in mutual funds and bonds

Watch it:

The term “blind trust” indicates that an investor has designated someone else to handle their investments and that the investor does not know what those investments are. In his 2006 Massachusetts state disclosure, Romney wrote that “under the terms of the blind trust, the Governor may have no knowledge of the specific holdings or management of the trust” except for very broad categories like “publicly traded stocks.”) Romney had called the use of such trusts a “ruse” in his 1994 senate campaign.

Last August, Romney filed his legally-required public financial disclosure report. As required, his signature appears on the form certifying that the infromation is “true, complete, and correct” to the best of his knowledge. From at least the time he completed that form, it ceased to be a “blind trust” as he knew what was in it.

But Romney’s comment suggests that the trust was “blind” for ten full years before that. It was not.

During his unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid, Romney disclosed the assets of his “blind trust” in his August 2007 filing. As a result, the trust ceased to be “blind” then, as well.

A ThinkProgress Economy analysis reveals that Romney’s 2011 “blind trust” disclosure identified 43 investments in 13 entities or financial services firms offering investments (CDs, mutual funds, bonds etc.). Of those, 33 were in entities or firms offering investments where he also had investments in his 2007 disclosure. And that 2007 form noted Romney had at least nine current or recently-sold investments with Goldman Sachs, worth millions of dollars.

While the particular funds varied (different mutual funds with Goldman, different bonds or CDs with the Federal Home Loan Banks, etc.), it strains credulity to for Romney suggest that he didn’t know his money was likely in Goldman Sachs between 2007 and 2011.

How Fox News Is Destroying The Republican Party

2012-01-27T00:29:00.000-05:00

by Eric Boehlert/Media Matters

Wannabe kingmaker Roger Ailes is facing an open revolt.

More and more despondent conservatives are expressing alarm over the unfolding Republican primary season and what they see as the party's dwindling chances of defeating President Obama in November. Spooked at the general elections prospects facing frontrunners Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich (especially Gingrich), members of the so-called Republican Establishment seem to want to reboot the election season and try their nominating luck again.

Sorry, it's too late.

If the current state of concern transforms into a larger, enveloping blame game, Fox News chairman Ailes ought be a looming target. True, conservatives in recent years have shown virtually no interest in critiquing, let alone trying to reign in, Ailes' empire. Still, it's becoming increasingly clear that Fox's programming and the radical, fear-based agenda it's setting for Republicans is now doing lasting damage to the Grand Old Party.

That's because Fox News isn't simply offering a rightward take on the day's events, or innocently providing Republican-friendly commentary, of course. It's leading an exhausting, day-in, day-out attack campaign against Obama, Democrats and all their liberal allies. (Real or imagined.) Its relentless, paranoid crusade falls well outside the mainstream of American politics, which is why the Republican primary season, so proudly sponsored by Fox News, is shaping up to be such an embarrassment.

Make no mistake, kingmaker Ailes has made sure his channel's profoundly un-serious stamppermeates this year's GOP contest. For more and more spooked Republicans though, it's a stamp of failure and looming defeat.

For Ailes and company, that slash-and-burn formula works wonders in terms of super-serving its hardcore, hard-right audience of three million viewers. But in terms of supporting a serious, national campaign and a serious, national conversation? It's not working. At all.

As Fox News has moved in and essentially replaced the RNC as the driving electoral force in Republican politics today, and with Ailes ensconced in his kingmaker role, candidates have had to bow down to Fox in search of votes and the channel's coveted free airtime. That means campaigns have been forced to become part of the channel's culture of personal destruction, as well as its signature self-pity.

The truth is, the Republican Establishment all but ceded control of the party, or at least the public face of the party, to Fox News (and Rush Limbaugh) in January, 2009. Party leaders, demoralized by John McCain's electoral landslide defeat, faded into the background and obediently followed Fox News' often-hysterical lead as Rupert Murdoch's cable channel unveiled an unprecedented effort to demonize and delegitimize the newly elected president. (In the Fox-led world, it's conventional wisdom that Obama's a foreign, race-baiting Marxist who undermines Israel and is determined to destroy the American way of life.)

With Fox News at the irresponsible helm, the conservative movement in America, including the emerging Tea Party, became first and foremost a media movement, and one that gleefully cut ties with common sense and decency. (See: Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh.)

As blogger Andrew Sullivan noted this week:

The Republican Establishment is Rush Limbaugh, Roger Ailes, Karl Rove, and their mainfold products, from Hannity to Levin. They rule on the talk radio airwaves and on the GOP's own "news" channel, Fox.

With media outlets setting the conservative agenda, as well as raising campaign funds and boosting GOP candidates, it was Fox News that quickly transformed itself into the Opposition Party. It was Roger Ailes who, officially or unofficially, began to wear two hats: Program Director at Fox News, Chairman of the RNC.

In terms of whipping up bouts of anti-Obama hysteria, the crass Fox approach enjoyed some short-term success. However, that same media movement is now three long and rhetorically repetitive years into its Obama crusade and trying to nominate a presidential candidate via an extended national campaign. According to more and more worried conservatives, the results on display are disastrous.

Of course, conservatives should have thought that through before handing over the reigns to Ailes and his misinformation minions. Indeed, none of this is unexpected. It's all entirely predictable. It's what happens when a mainstream political movement embraces a radical media strategy like the one being promoted by Fox News; the movement marches itself off a cliff.

Conservative leaders themselves have freely adopted Fox News' profoundly un-unprofessional rhetoric about Obama, claiming just this week he's "pro-poverty" and his politics are "almost un-American." That's the Fox-ification of the GOP.

As Andrew Sullivan noted this week, the current GOP "purges dissidents, it vaunts total loyalty, it polices discourse for any deviation." That sounds a lot like Fox News.

Two years ago, despondent conservative and former Bush speechwriter David Frum, noting the sweeping power that Ailes was accumulating, observed that, "Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us, and now we are discovering we work for Fox."

As the Republican primary unfolds, I wonder if more and more poll-weary conservatives would like to fire their new boss.

Poll: Obama’s fairness message is resonating

2012-01-27T00:23:00.001-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Mini Michigan round up

2012-01-27T00:17:00.000-05:00

Chris Savage AKA electablog takes apart The Detroit News over the EM law

President Obama leads Willard Romney in Michigan by eight points

What’s "Right to Work" Really About?

2012-01-27T00:10:00.000-05:00

By Dawn Kettinger/John Karebian/ Progress Michigan

All workers deserve a say in their wages, benefits and working conditions. Without a strong voice in the workplace, nurses and other employees can be taken advantage of by corporations that care only about increasing their profits.

One way that CEOs and their political supporters are trying to silence workers is by pushing so-called “Right to Work” legislation in Michigan and around the country.

Despite the misleading name, “Right to Work” laws do not provide rights to a job. They also do not have anything to do with people being forced to join a union or required to pay union dues that fund political causes they disagree with (federal law already prohibits both of these).

Instead, the laws are aimed at destroying unions’ ability to effectively represent workers and bargain for fair wages and benefits. They do this by interfering with the relationship between employees and employers, banning them from negotiating a contract that requires all members of a union who benefit from representation to pay their fair share.

Pulling the financial rug out from under unions takes bargaining power away from workers, resulting in a “race to the bottom” in states like Arkansas and Mississippi.

“Right to Work” laws are often referred to as “Right to Work (For Less)” laws because of their destructive impact. Research show s that for both union and non-union workers, “Right to Work” laws:

Lower wages, by an average of $1,500 per year
Decrease the likelihood that employees receive health insurance
Decrease the likelihood that employees receive a pension

“Right to Work” laws have no impact on job growth and economic development. By lowering wages, “Right to Work” can actually hurt job creation: When consumers don’t have money to spend, businesses suffer.

It’s clear that if “Right to Work” legislation passes, Michigan workers would suffer and economic recovery for the 99 percent would be even further away. It’s also clear that this is part of a national campaign to take power away from middle-class workers - a campaign committed by greedy corporations and the politicians they control with their money.

MNA is standing up against these attacks to silence working men and women.

Through successful contracts at the University of Michigan and elsewhere, we’ve shown that unions are essential to providing a check against employers’ unreasonable demands.

And through our Main Street Contract campaign, we’re working to change our nation’s priorities so that jobs at living wages are available for all.

By uniting and putting power where it belongs - in the hands of those who do the work, not those who merely profit from it - workers can make Michigan a state where everyone has the opportunity to prosper

GOP lawmaker: Virtually impossible to get AIDS through heterosexual sex

2012-01-26T23:45:00.000-05:00

By Eric W. Dolan/Raw Story

Tennessee state Sen. Stacey Campfield (R) falsely claimed on Thursday that it was nearly impossible for someone to contract AIDS through heterosexual contact.

“Most people realize that AIDS came from the homosexual community,” he told Michelangelo Signorile, who hosts a radio program on SiriusXM OutQ. “It was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, if I recall.”

“My understanding is that it is virtually — not completely, but virtually — impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex.”

It is generally accepted that at some point HIVcrossed species from chimps to humans, but there is no evidence that this was caused by bestiality. Rick Sowadsky of the Nevada State Health Division AIDS program noted in 1998 that it highly unlikely that HIV was transmitted through inter-species sexual contact, given the behavior of chimps and the differences between the sexual anatomy of humans and other primates.

According to the the Center for Disease Control, male-to-male sexual contact has been the most common way to transmit AIDS, followed by injection drug use and heterosexual sex.

Campfield briefly gained national attention in 2011 when he introduced legislation that critics derided as “the don’t say gay bill.”

“[Homosexuals] do not naturally reproduce,” he told Signorile. “It has not been proven that it is nature. It happens in nature, but so does beastiality. That does not make it right or something we should be teaching in school.”

Cory Booker Responds To Christie: ‘I Wouldn’t Be Where I Am’ If Civil Rights Were Put To A Popular Vote

2012-01-26T23:37:00.000-05:00

By Igor Volsky/Think Progress

Newark Mayor Cory Booker called into WNYC’s The Brian Lehrer show this morning to condemn New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) for suggesting that voters should decide whether gay and lesbian people should be allowed to marry in the state. Christie expanded on his comments yesterday, claiming “people would have been happy to have areferendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South.”

“Frankly, I wouldn’t be where I am today,” if states had voted on equal rights legislation for African Americans during the 1960s, Booker told Lehrer. “This is not about a choice, it’s about a fundamental right and the 14th Amendment is very clear. It says, ‘equal protections under the law’ and right now in America we have second-class citizenship set-up where certain Americans can have privileges that certain Americans do not enjoy and that is just wrong.” Listen:

Booker has registered his outrage with Christie’s comments in a formal statement, during a press conference, and through his Twitter account. “This isn’t a right/left issue. There are many Republicans that are in favor of marriage equality, I’m just hoping that our legislature acts,” he said on the radio and predicted that putting the issue on the November ballot could help the GOP turn out conservative voters.

He added, “there are somethings I don’t mind putting on the ballot — we’re thinking about here in Newark putting on the ballot a question of do we want to pay a 1 percent more in property taxes to fund our police department — those kinds of things I think are good, but when it comes to fundamental rights that I believe are explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution… I do not think they should be subject to popular whim.”

Booker has long supported marriage equality and refuses to “perform marriages at Newark city hall until all couples have the right” to marry.

ROMNEY OMITTED FUNDS HELD IN OFFSHORE TAX HAVENS FROM ETHICS FORMS

2012-01-26T23:13:00.000-05:00

By Travis Waldron/Think Progress

A now-closed Swiss bank account and at least 23 investment funds listed in former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s (R) recently released tax returns were not listed in his most recent financial disclosure forms, which are required to run for office. Among the unlisted funds were 11 based in offshore tax havens like Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and Luxembourg, the Los Angeles Times reported today, and many are associated with Bain Capital, the private equity firm Romney co-founded. According to the Times, Romney’s campaign dismissed the discrepancies as “trivial” but said they will have to make “some minor technical amendments” to Romney’s disclosure forms.

Confronted At Debate, Romney Does Not Dispute He Profited From Foreclosures In Florida

2012-01-26T22:52:00.000-05:00

By Travis Waldron/Think Progress

ThinkProgress reported Wednesday that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) has profited from thousands of Florida foreclosures through a Goldman Sachs investment fund. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) blasted Romney on the trail today for those investments, and re-upped those attacks in tonight’s CNN debate.

Romney attempted to explain away the investments, saying he didn’t control them because they were part of a blind trust:

GINGRICH: Governor Romney has investments in Goldman Sachs, which is today foreclosing on Floridians. So maybe Governor Romney, in the spirit of openness, should tell us how much money he’s made off of how many households that have been foreclosed by his investments.

ROMNEY: First of all, my investments are not made by me. My investments for the last 10 years have been in a blind trust, managed by a trustee. Secondly, the investments they’ve made, we’ve learned about this as we made our financial disclosure, have been made in mutual funds and bonds. I don’t own stock in either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. There are bonds the investor has held through mutual funds. And Mr. Speaker, I know that sounds like an enormous revelation, but have you checked your own investments? You also have investments through mutual funds that also invest in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Watch it:

Notably, Romney never denied the charge that he made money off of foreclosures. Later in the debate, Romney was asked about the $3 million he kept in a Swiss bank account before it was closed in 2010. Again, Romney attempted to brush aside the question, saying, “I have a trustee” who manages a blind trust.

Romney’s reliance on blind trusts is interesting, considering it was he who called them “a ruse” when running against former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D) in 1994. And as ABC News noted, the trusts are “not so blind,” since they have been noted on his financial disclosure forms. The trusts are also maintained by Romney’s personal lawyer and don’t meet federal standards for elected officials. Romney’s original investments into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, meanwhile, werenever in a blind trust.

Right-Wing Media Launch Predictable Attacks On Obama's State Of The Union Address

2012-01-25T23:43:00.000-05:00

From Media Matters

Right-wing media have responded to President Obama's State of the Union speech with predictable attacks, calling it "class warfare" and claiming it was "transparently partisan."

Right-Wing Media Predictably Respond To Obama's Speech By Crying "Class Warfare"

Doocy: Obama Used "Warren Buffett's Secretary To Kick Off His Class Warfare Campaign." On the January 25 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy teased a segment about Obama's speech by saying, "The president us[ed] Warren Buffett's secretary to kick off his class warfare campaign in last night's State of the Union address." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 1/25/12]

Fox's Ramsey: "Last Night Our President Declared War On Success In The Name Of This Class Warfare Politics." Later during the January 25 show, Fox's finance expert Dave Ramsey said, "Last night, our president declared war on success -- in the name of this class warfare politics and this envy, he has come out and vilified the people who work like [millionaires do]." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 1/25/12]

Hannity: "Tonight, Instead Of Embracing An Opportunity To Bring America Together, [Obama] Elected To Invoke Class Warfare." On the January 24 edition of his Fox News show, which aired immediately after the State of the Union address, Sean Hannity said, "Tonight instead of embracing an opportunity to bring America together the president elected to invoke class warfare and further split an already deeply divided nation by focusing on partisan issues rather than pressing ones." [Fox News, Hannity, 1/24/12, via Nexis]

Hannity: "I Didn't Get Any Sense At All Of Any Grand Vision That [Obama] Has For The Country Short Of Igniting These Embers Of Class Warfare." Later on the broadcast, while interviewing Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Hannity said of Obama's speech: "One of the thing that really struck me tonight, if he's going to go out to America and travel across this country and make the case four more years, I didn't get any sense at all of any grand vision that he has for the country, short of igniting these embers of class warfare.I didn't hear anything too inspiring." [Fox News, Hannity, 1/24/12, via Nexis]

Wash. Times: "A State Of Class Warfare: President Ignores America's Heritage As A Land Of Opportunity." From a January 24 Washington Times editorial posted prior to the president's State of the Union address:

Whenever President Obama is in the same room as his teleprompter, expect to hear the class warrior emerge. Mr. Obama's words Tuesday were no exception.

In its sneak peak at the president's State of the Union remarks, the White House highlighted Mr. Obama's intention to say we can "either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while more Americans barely get by. Or we can build a nation where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules."

[...]

Jobs and prosperity won't grow as long as regulatory burdens stifle output, and our tax code is turned into an instrument to discourage and punish success. It's time for America to discard Mr. Obama's class-warfare message and reclaim our heritage as a land of opportunity. [The Washington Times, 1/24/12]

Hoft: "Let The Class Warfare Begin." In a January 24 Gateway Pundit post - also written before Obama gave his State of the Union address -- right-wing blogger Jim Hoft wrote, "Barack Obama will attack the rich tonight in his State of the Union address." The post was titled, "Let the class warfare begin... Obama SOTU Address -- January 24, 2012." [Gateway Pundit, 1/24/12]

Obama: "We Don't Begrudge Financial Success In This Country"

Obama In SOTU: "We Don't Begrudge Financial Success In This Country. We Admire It." From Obama's January 24 State of the Union remarks:

Tax reform should follow the Buffett Rule. If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. In fact, if you're earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn't get special tax subsidies or deductions. On the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families, your taxes shouldn't go up. (Applause.) You're the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages. You're the ones who need relief.

Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense.

We don't begrudge financial success in this country. We admire it. When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it's not because they envy the rich. It's because they understand that when I get a tax break I don't need and the country can't afford, it either adds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference -- like a senior on a fixed income, or a student trying to get through school, or a family trying to make ends meet. That's not right. Americans know that's not right. They know that this generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other, and to the future of their country, and they know our way of life will only endure if we feel that same sense of shared responsibility. That's how we'll reduce our deficit. That's an America built to last. (Applause.) [WhiteHouse.gov, 1/24/12]

Right-Wing Media Have Previously Attacked Obama For Engaging In "Class Warfare"

Fox Responded To Obama's Speech On Inequality By Crying "Class Warfare." Fox News figures responded to Obama's December 6, 2011, speech on inequality in American by accusing him of engaging in class warfare. [Media Matters, 12/6/11]

Fox Attacked Obama's Jobs Bill As "Class Warfare." In September 2011, Fox figures responded to Obama's job plan by accusing Obama of engaging in "class warfare." [Media Matters, 9/13/11]

Fox Complained That A Proposal To Eliminate Tax Breaks On Corporate Jets Was "Straightforward Class Warfare." After Obama cited tax breaks for corporate jets as an example of tax loopholes that could be closed to raise revenue, Fox News personalities criticized the proposal as unfair and accused Obama of engaging in "straightforward class warfare." [Media Matters, 6/30/11]

Right-Wing Media Complain Obama's Speech Was "Transparently Partisan"

Hannity: The President's Address Was "Partisan." On his Fox News show, Hannity played an excerpt of Obama's address and said, "The president's partisan address this evening comes as the battle for the Republican nomination rages on with the Florida primary only one week away." [Fox News,Hannity, 1/24/12, via Nexis]

Fleischer: SOTU Shows Obama "Does Not Want To Work With [Republicans] To Get Things Done." On CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, former Bush White House press secretary Ari Fleischer claimed: "When it comes to doing the hard work of governing, [Obama] just likes to give speeches. That's the difference but then I think that's what Republicans heard tonight and why there is a sense that he work with us to get things done." [CNN, Anderson Cooper 360, 1/24/12, via Nexis]

Rubin: Obama's Address Was "A Transparently Partisan Kick-Off Speech For His 2012 Election Campaign." In her January 24 Washington Post column, Jennifer Rubin wrote:

President Obama's third State of the Union address was, as expected, a transparently partisan kick-off speech for his 2012 election campaign.

[...]

It was a painfully long and shapeless speech, designed to cheer Democrats and stick his finger in the eyes of Republicans. (He's not going to let them poison kids with mercury, thank goodness.) He talks about Washington being broken as if he were a passive observer -- which I suppose he is. He decries nasty partisanship, as if he had not accused Republicans of putting party over country. [The Washington Post, 1/24/12]

Fox Nation: "SOTU -- Too Long, Too Partisan, Too Barren Of Policy." On January 24, Fox Nation posted an excerpt from Rubin's Washington Post column under the headline, "SOTU -- Too Long, Too Partisan, Too Barren Of Policy." From Fox Nation:

Why Republican Oligarchs May Not Choose to Defend Mitt Romney

2012-01-25T23:39:00.000-05:00

John Nichols/The Nation

It is fair to say that few candidates in modern history have done themselves more damage than did Mitt Romney’s “crack” campaign team when it decided to release the candidate’s tax returns on the day that President Obama was delivering a State of the Union address about tax fairness.

If Romney has not fired the “genius” who suggested the idea of releasing the returns on SOTU day—apparently in hopes the news that Romney was only paying at a 13.9 percent rate would be overshadowed by the presidential pronouncement—he should do so.

The miscalculation on the part of Romney and his campaign was startling. Instead of avoiding the spotlight on an issue that is severely damaging to his candidacy—both as a contender for the Republican nomination and, should he survive the trial by Newt, as the party’s candidate in a fall race with Obama—he stepped right into it.

Romney’s bad timing made him Exhibit A in the national debate about why the the billionaires and millionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.

Or, as the Los Angeles Times headline put it: “Romney tax returns highlight tax code’s breaks for rich.”

That’s bad for Romney.

But he is not the only 1 Percenter who is threatened.

If America is entering a new populist moment, where the slogan “Tax the Rich” is dusted off by Democratic candidates, and perhaps even a few Republicans, the filthiest of the filthy rich might have to clean up their acts.

Or, to be more precise, they might have to pay their fair share.

If the program Obama is promoting gets traction, Romney’s tax burden would double.

And, while we are only talking degrees of guilt here, Romney actually pays more taxes than a lot of the other guys at the country club.

So this raises a question: Do the CEOs, the investment bankers and the hedge fund managers who form the real base of the Republican Party—as the funders of GOP candidates and the Super PACs that sustain them—really want to nominate a candidate whose very presence at the top of the ticket guarantees that the lifestyles of the rich and contemptuous will be a 2012 campaign issue?

Are they feeling that lucky?

If not, they’re going to be looking elsewhere, especially if William Jennings Gingrich wins next Tuesday’s Florida primary. There will not be a groundswell among the monied elites for Gingrich. He’s toxic. But the roadblock he is creating to Romney opens up the prospect that Republican powerbrokers might be able to create a new candidacy come convention time.

Gingrich’s sweep of the South Carolina primary last Saturday made Romney damaged goods.

But the tax returns fiasco has done the former front-runner’s prospects even more damage.

And as the damage was being done, there was Mitch Daniels looking all presidential for his State of the Union response.

Don’t think the people who write big checks to Republican candidates in order to avoid writing big checks to the IRS failed to notice.

Republicans won't applaud good economic

2012-01-25T23:32:00.000-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The end of Romney?

2012-01-25T23:30:00.000-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Mini Michigan round up

2012-01-25T23:27:00.000-05:00

It seems the U.P. has fallen out of love with tea baggers

Chris Savage shines a light on another bad idea from the Michigan Republicans

Santorum: Obama Defunded Abstinence Programs Because He Wants ‘People To Be In Poverty’

2012-01-25T23:13:00.000-05:00

By Igor Volsky/Think Progress

Rick Santorum criticized the Obama administration for reducing federal funding to abstinence-only programs during a town hall in Florida this morning, and claimed that the president’s decision to de-emphasize the initiatives suggests that Obama wants “people to be in poverty.” “What is this president doing,” Santorum asked, “he is deliberately misinforming the most vulnerable people in our society and targeting them toward a life that has economic potential.” Watch it:

The Department of Health and Human Services did change its policy for grant awardees, limiting how programs that receive federal dollars can teach abstinence. But those groups can continue preaching abstinence in non-federally funded initiatives, even though the evidence suggests that such programs are ineffective or “even harmful and have negative consequences by not providing adequate information for those teens who do become sexually active.” Studies have not found that abstinence-only programs cut pregnancy rates, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), or even the age when sexual activity begins.

Gingrich promises moon base that could become 51st state

2012-01-25T23:10:00.000-05:00

By David Edwards/Raw

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich on Wednesday vowed to build a lunar colony that he said could eventually become the 51st state.

Speaking to Republicans on Florida’s Space Coast, the former House Speaker explained that the “grandiose” idea would be possible because the government would fuel innovation by awarding prizes and incentives to private businesses.

“At one point early in my career, I introduced the Northwest Ordinance for Space,” Gingrich recalled, referring to it as the “weirdest thing” he’d ever done. “I said when we got — I think the number is 13,000 — when we have 13,000 Americans living on the moon, they can petition to become a state.”

“By the end of my second term, we will have the first permanent base on the moon and it will be American,” the candidate insisted. “We will have commercial near-Earth activities that included science, tourism and manufacturing.”

“I accept the charge that I am an American and Americans are instinctively grandiose because we believe in a bigger future!” he exclaimed. “I want you to help me both in Florida and across the country so that you can someday say you were here the day it was announce that of course we’d have commercial space and near space. Of course we’d have a man colony on the moon that flew an American flag.”

Gingrich later joked to reporters about his chances with voters stationed at the lunar colony.

“I think the moon primary would come late in the season,” he said.

Watch this video from CNN, broadcast Jan. 25, 2012.

EXCLUSIVE: Romney Profited From Mortgage Lenders Foreclosing On Thousands Of Floridians

2012-01-25T23:00:00.001-05:00

By Josh Israel/Think Progress

A ThinkProgress examination of Mitt Romney’s presidential personal financial disclosures from May 2011 reveal that the former Massachusetts governor and his wife own or owned millions of dollars worth of a Goldman Sachs investment fund invested heavily in mortgage-backed obligations. And the current owners of those mortgage debts began foreclosure proceedings against thousands of Floridians.

Along with his investments in Bain Capital funds linked to offshore tax havens, the Romneys have large investments in the Goldman Sachs Strategic Income Fund (institutional class). The firm’s March 2011 annual report for the fund notes that about 8 percent of the fund is invested in banks and 24.5 percent is invested in mortgage-backed obligations. Romney’s form says he has invested between $1,000,001 and $5,000,000 in the fund and his wife Ann has invested an additional $1 million-plus. Since the 2008 economic meltdown and the enactment of the Troubled Asset Relief Fund, this fund has done quite well, growing 7.88 percent between April 2010 and March 2011.

The mortgage-backed securities in the fund include adjustable rate mortgages from Bear Stearns, Countrywide, IndyMac, and Washington Mutual. A 2009 Center for Public Integrity report identified all four of those companies as among the top-25 subprime lenders in the lead-up to the market’s collapse. Countrywide ranked first in that report and Washington Mutual ranked second. While the remnants of those companies have been purchased by major financial institutions, an array of mortgage loan service companies bought up the individual mortgages.

An examination of civil cases filed in Miami-Dade county alone, by just the current owners of the mortgage obligations for now-defunct Washington Mutual and Countrywide, suggests more than 5,000 foreclosure cases were filed in 2010.

And Miami-Dade makes up only about 13 percent of the Florida population, suggesting that these and the other owners mortgage-backed securities included in this fund likely have attempted to foreclose on tens of thousands of Floridians.

A review of Romney’s August 2007 financial disclosure for his 2008 campaign reveals no mention of the Goldman Sachs Strategic Income Fund, suggesting the investment was made at some point between the two campaigns.

The funds are identified on the disclosure form as technically being in a “blind trust,” but now that he has publicly disclosed these assets, the trust is no longer functionally “blind.” The trustee for the trust, R. Bradlford Malt, said this week that he dropped some other Romney investments that conflicted with the Republican Party’s values.

In October, Romney suggested that the solution to the foreclosure crisis was “don’t try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom.” While that process is bad for Florida homeowners, these investments show it may have been good for the Romneys.

Watch Mitt Spin: Romney Claims His Real Tax Rate Is ‘Closer To 45 Or 50 Percent’

2012-01-25T21:07:00.000-05:00

By Judd Legum/Think Progress

During an interview with Univision, Romney was pressed on whether it was fair for him to pay about 13 percent of his income in taxes — as he did in 2010, according to his recently released tax returns — when many middle class families pay far more. Romney proceeded to claim that his actual rate is “closer to 45 or 50 percent.”

To justify his figure, Romney relied on his belief that “corporations are people.” When Univision’s Jorge Ramos asked Romney if his 13 percent tax rate is “fair,” Romney suggested adding the maximum corporate tax rate (35 percent) to his personal taxes to calculate his real rate:

RAMOS: You just released your tax returns. In 2010 you only paid 13 percent of taxes while most Americans paid much more than that. Is that fair?

ROMNEY: Well, actually, I released two years of taxes and I think the average is almost 15 percent. And then also, on top of that, I gave another more 15 percent to charity. When you add it together with all of the taxes and the charity, particularly in the last year, I think it reaches almost 40 percent that I gave back to the community. One of the reasons why we have a lower tax rate on capital gains is because capital gains are also being taxed at the corporate level. So as businesses earn profits, that’s taxed at 35 percent, then as they distribute those profits as dividends, that’s taxed at 15 percent more. So, all total, the tax rate is really closer to 45 or 50 percent.

RAMOS: But is it fair what you pay, 13 percent, while most pay much more than that?

ROMNEY: Well, again, I go back to the point that the, that the funds are being taxed twice at two different levels.

Watch it:

Romney glosses over the fact that he is not a corporation and doesn’t pay corporate taxes. Additionally, most corporations pay far lower than a 35 percent rate. In fact, many profitable corporations pay nothing at all.

In the alternative, Romney suggested that his tax rate should be considered “almost 40 percent” because he gave a substantial amount of money to charity, mostly to the Mormon church. Romney should be lauded for his charitable contributions — and received a tax deduction for them — but charitable contributions are not taxes.

"A Classic Example Of What Is Wrong With Our National Discourse"

2012-01-24T01:34:00.000-05:00

by Matt Gertz/Media Matters

A network that employs one contributor who repeatedly threatened to pull a "gun" on government employees and another who praised U.S. Marines for apparently urinating on dead Afghans is now hosting discredited liar Andrew Breitbart to provide political commentary. CNN anchors previously said that Breitbart lacks credibility following his use of deceptively edited video to smear former Obama administration official Shirley Sherrod as a racist.

Breitbart has appeared on CNN four times this year, including interviews with the network's hosts Dr. Drew Pinsky and Piers Morgan in panel segments during their coverage of the Iowa caucuses and theSouth Carolina and New Hampshire Republican primaries. Pinsky also hosted Breitbart on the January 20 edition of his show, Dr. Drew.

CNN is well aware of Breitbart's history of fabrications and his lack of credibility. After his infamous Sherrod smear unraveled, CNN's own Anderson Cooper calling his actions "a classic example of what is wrong with our national discourse." Cooper joined a wide array of media who criticized Breitbart's tactics and pointed to what Ben Smith called his "growing credibility problem."

As recently as last November, CNN's Don Lemon reported that a remark from President Obama had been "taken out of context" in an ad produced by Mitt Romney's campaign and commented, "for those on the right who are jumping on the lazy bandwagon, perhaps they should remember that context is everything. And there's always the videotape. Just ask Andrew Breitbart and Shirley Sherrod."

Even Morgan has said that it is "perfectly natural to be suspicious of Mr. Breitbart" and "understandable people might be at least skeptical" of his reporting "given his track record."

In 2010, ABC News drew widespread criticism, including from its own newsroom, after Breitbart's website reported -- and Media Matters confirmed -- that he would be providing analysis for the network during its election night coverage. ABC's George Stephanopoulos had previously called out Breitbart for pushing claims about Shirley Sherrod that were "clearly not true." The network subsequently announced that Breitbart would "not be a part of the ABC News broadcast coverage," but rather would be "participating in an online-only discussion and debate" for ABCNews.com. After many recriminations, with Breitbart saying he had been promised broadcast time and ABC responding that he had "exaggerated the role he would play," ABC dropped him from its elections coverage.

Surely CNN can also find a conservative to discuss elections who hasn't had his credibility rightfully criticized by the network's own anchors.

Radio host: Gingrich’s race rhetoric still indefensible

2012-01-24T01:29:00.001-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Obama To Speak In Ann Arbor

2012-01-24T01:25:00.000-05:00

From CBS Detroit:

ANN ARBOR (WWJ) – President Barack Obama will be in town on Friday morning. He’ll deliver a speech at the University of Michigan campus in Ann Arbor.

The event is free and open to the public. Tickets are required and will be available at the following ticket distribution location beginning at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday at the Michigan Union Ticket Office on South State Street.

Tickets will be limited to one per person and will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis.

Obama last visited the University of Michigan on May 1, 2010 for a commencement address at Michigan Stadium.

Romney berates Gingrich for making ‘$35,000 a year’

2012-01-24T01:20:00.000-05:00

By David Edwards/raw story

Multimillionaire Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney blasted former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Monday for the way he made a living in recent years.

During a NBC debate in Tampa, Florida, Romney charged that Gingrich had “peddled influence” in his role as an advisor for the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC), also known as Freddie Mac.

“You said you were paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac for an historian,” Romney explained. “They don’t pay people $25,000 a month for six years as historian. That adds up to $1.6 million.”

As the head of venture capital firm Bain Capital, Romney made millions for himself by buying and selling distressed companies, sometimes eliminating thousands of jobs. Earlier this month, Romney claimed that the $374,327.62 he made in speaker’s fees the most recent year were “not very much.”

“As a business man, you know that the gross revenue of Bain wasn’t your personal income,” Gingrich told Romney. “We had a company. The company was being paid. My share was about $35,000 a year. … What’s the gross revenue of Bain in the years you were associated with it?”

“Very substantial,” Romney admitted.

“Did Bain ever do any work with any company that did any work with the government like Medicare?” Gingrich pressed.

“We didn’t do any work with the government,” Romney insisted.

“I understand your technique which you used on McCain, you used on Huckabeee,” Gingrich shot back. “You used consistently. OK? It’s unfortunate.”

Romney’s claim that he never did any work with the government while at Bain may not be exactly true.

According to Deseret News, Bain purchased Damon Corp. in 1989, a medical medical testing firm that eventually pleaded guilty to defrauding the government to the tune of $25 million. The company later paid a $119 million fine.

Romney also has $500,000 invested in Freddie Mac’s sister organization, Fannie Mae.

Last week, liberal comedian Bill Maher noted that the reason many Americans disliked Romney wasn’t because of his massive wealth.

“It’s not because he’s rich,” Maher said. “It’s how he got rich.”

The former Massachusetts governor now has a net worth of up to $250 million. Gingrich sports a net worth of about $6.7 million.

Watch this video from NBC News, broadcast Jan. 23, 2012.

Arkansas Democratic Campaign Manager Comes Home To Find Child’s Cat Murdered, ‘LIBERAL’ Written On Dead Body

2012-01-24T00:54:00.000-05:00

By Scott Keyes/Think Progress

The campaign manager of Arkansas Democratic congressional candidate Ken Aden arrived home last night to find his child’s pet cat murdered on the front porch with the word “LIBERAL” scrawled across its lifeless body.

Aden’s campaign manager, Jake Burris, lives in central Arkansas with his four kids. Blue Arkansas has more on the scene at Burris’s home (emphases are ours):

Last night, Jake and his four kids had come back to their Russellville home. As they were getting out of the car, one of his children discovered their family cat dead on the front porch. One side of the animal’s head had been bashed in and an eyeball was hanging out of its socket. But there was something even more horrifying to be found on the corpse. Written across the animal’s fur in black marker was the word “LIBERAL“.

Here is a picture of the family’s murdered cat:

Pope County, where Burris lives, is a highly-conservative area of Arkansas. Aden has been running for the 3rd congressional district seat, currently held by Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR), since August 2011. He released a statement on the matter this morning: “To kill a child’s pet is just unconscionable. As a former combat soldier, I’ve seen the best of humanity and the worst of humanity. Whoever did this is definitely part of the worst of humanity.”

It is unclear at this time precisely who committed this heinous act.

Buffett On Why Romney Should Pay Higher Taxes: He’s Just ‘Shoving Around Money,’ Not ‘Straining His Back’

2012-01-23T20:22:00.000-05:00

By Pat Garofalo/Think Progress

Last week, Mitt Romney finally admitted that he pays a tax rate of 15 percent, lower than that of many middle-class families. Romney is taxed at such a low rate because, as he freely admits, all of his income comes from investments, and is thus subject to the top capital gains tax rate of 15 percent, rather than the top income tax rate of 35 percent.

However, Romney has refused to sign on to the Obama administration’s “Buffett rule,” which aims to ensure that millionaires can’t dodge taxes to the extent that they’re paying less than teachers. Today, billionaire investor Warren Buffett himself was asked about Romney’s tax rate, replying that letting millionaire investors like Romney pay such low taxes is “the wrong policy” because he makes his income by just “shoving around money”:

He makes his money the same way I make my money. He makes money by moving around big bucks, not by straining his back and going to work cleaning the toilets or whatever it may be. He makes it shoving around money. I make it shoving around money. If you look at the 400 highest incomes in the United States, they average $220 million. Something like 90 of them are effectively unemployed. They have no earned income, and that number has gone up over the years. [...]

It’s the wrong policy to have. Nothing wrong about [Romney] doing that. He will not pay more than the law requires. I don’t fault him for that in the least, but I do fault the law that allows him and me, earning enormous sums to pay over all federal taxes at a rate that is about half what the average person in my office pays.

Watch it:

Not only does Romney make all of his money from investments, but his company Bain Capital (with which Romney still has a lucrative retirement deal) uses tax havens to boost its profits.

Romney Blasts Gingrich’s Payments From Freddie Mac While Also Profiting From The Mortgage Giant

2012-01-23T20:11:00.000-05:00

By Pat Garofalo/Think Progress

2012 GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney today broke out a harsher line on Newt Gingrich, Saturday’s winner of the South Carolina GOP primary, once again saying that the former speaker of the House should give back the $1.7 million in payments he received from mortgage giant Freddie Mac. “He said in a debate, actually, that people who profited from the failed model of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae ought to give back their money,” Romney noted. “Well, the speaker made $1.7 million in his enterprises from providing services to Freddie Mac. He ought to give it back.”

But Romney is throwing stones from within his own glass house, as he also profits from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, as the Boston Globe detailed back in September:

On his financial disclosure statement filed last month, Romney reported owning between $250,001 and $500,000 in a mutual fund that invests in debt notes of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, among other government entities. Over the previous year, he had reported earning between $15,001 and $50,000 in interest from those investments.

And unlike most of Romney’s financial holdings, which are held in a blind trust that is overseen by a trustee and not known to Romney, this particular investment was among those that would have been known to Romney.

Over the weekend, Romney intends to start airing an ad that will say, “While Florida families lost everything in the housing crisis, Newt Gingrich cashed in. Gingrich was paid over $1.6 million by the scandal-ridden agency that helped create the crisis.” Shockingly enough, the ad fails to mention Romney’s own investments in the government backed mortgage giants, which have netted him tens of thousands of dollars.

Random Friday: Resident Evil 6 trailer

2012-01-20T21:14:00.000-05:00

The Fox Primary By the Numbers, January 9 - 15, 2012

2012-01-20T21:11:00.000-05:00

by Oliver Willis/Media Matters

Former Fox employees Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich took the lion's share of last week's Fox Primary, with the two collectively appearing on Fox for over an hour and a half. Santorum and Gingrich accounted for over 50 percent of the time Fox devoted to interviewing the Republican presidential field.

Mitt Romney made just one appearance, but his presence was felt elsewhere on Fox, with host Eric Bolling declaring "we're all on board if Mitt's it," while Sean Hannity warned off Gingrich and Rick Perry from attacking Romney's record at Bain Capital.

So who's winning the Fox Primary? Each week at Media Matters, we watch the interviews, crunch the numbers, and tell you what Fox is up to in the presidential campaign.

Last Week's Results

Total time: 3 hours and 4 minutes; Total appearances: 29

Most Total Airtime on Fox: Newt Gingrich (59 minutes)

Most Total Appearances: Newt Gingrich (8 appearances)

Fox Show with the Most Total Candidate Airtime: On The Record (35 minutes)

Fox Show with the Most Candidate Appearances: Fox and Friends (6 appearances)

Longest Candidate Interview: Fox News Sunday (13 minutes with Rick Santorum)

Softball Question(s) of the Week: During the January 10, 2012, edition of Happening Now, Fox News host Jon Scott asked candidate Rick Santorum:

SCOTT: What's the biggest misimpression about you that you think people -- should be -- should have corrected?

(A table of the January 9 - 15, 2012 data is available here.)

The Numbers Since June 1, 2011

Total time: 86 hours and 37 minutes; Total appearances: 691

Most Total Airtime on Fox since June 1: Herman Cain (11 hours and 6 minutes)

Most Total Appearances since June 1: Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul (78 appearances each)

Fox Show with the Most Total Candidate Airtime Since June 1: On the Record with Greta Van Susteren (14 hours and 11 minutes)

Fox Show with the Most Candidate Appearances since June 1: On the Record with Greta Van Susteren (103 appearances)

Longest Candidate Interview since June 1: Stossel (40 minutes with Gary Johnson)

(A table of all the data since June 1, 2011 is available here.)

Previous Fox Primary Reports

June 1 - 5, 2011
June 6 - 12, 2011
June 13 - 19, 2011
June 20 - 26, 2011
June 27 - July 4, 2011
July 5 - 10, 2011
July 11 - 17, 2011
July 18 - 24, 2011
July 25 - 31, 2011
August 1 - 7, 2011
August 8 - 14, 2011
August 15 - 21, 2011
August 22 - 28, 2011
August 29 - September 4, 2011
September 5 - 11, 2011
September 12 - 18, 2011
September 19 - 25, 2011
September 26 - October 2, 2011
October 3 - 9, 2011October 10 - 16, 2011
October 17 - 23, 2011
October 24 - 30, 2011
October 31 - November 6, 2011
November 7 - 13, 2011
November 14 - 20, 2011
November 21 - 27, 2011
November 28 - December 4, 2011
December 5 - 11, 2011
December 12 - 18, 2011
December 19, 2011 - January 1, 2012
January 2-8, 2012

Methodology

Media Matters searched the Nexis database for all guest appearances on Fox News Channel, Fox Business Network, and Fox News Sunday for the 10 declared and potential presidential candidates in question: Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Buddy Roemer, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum.

For programs where a transcript was unavailable, Media Matters reviewed the raw video.

Changes to the reports

Media Matters added McCotter to the data beginning on June 20, 2011 and Roemer beginning on July 21, 2011. We stopped including McCotter on September 22, 2011; he dropped out of the race that day.

We stopped including Pawlenty and Trump in the data beginning on August 14, 2011; Pawlenty dropped out of the race on that date. And while Trump stated that he would no longer seek the Republican nomination but may instead run as an independent (on June 1, 2011, the beginning of this report), we decided to drop him from the data on this date.

We stopped including Bolton in the data beginning on September 6, 2011; Bolton decided not to run on this date.

We stopped including Palin in the data after her decision not to run was made on October 5, 2011.

We stopped including Giuliani in the data after he announced on October 11, 2011 that he would not run.

We stopped including Cain in the data when he suspended his campaign on December 3, 2011.

We stopped including Johnson in the data on December 28, 2011; Johnson announced he would seek the Libertarian Party's nomination.

We stopped including Bachmann in the data when she suspended her campaign on January 4, 2012.

Did Romney sink his own campaign?

2012-01-20T21:03:00.000-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Michigan Round up for the weekend

2012-01-20T21:01:00.000-05:00

Picture from 50states.com

News and views from around the great state of Michigan:

Chris Savage AKA electablog runs down what the various state appointed Emergency mangers are up to

Eric B from Michigan Liberal gives a foreign policy lesson to chief Michigan Republican propagandist Nolan Finley

After bombing the State of the State address Gov.Snyder may opt out of giving future state of the state speeches

Gingrich Says ‘Work’ Is A ‘Strange, Distant Concept’ To Juan Williams

2012-01-20T20:29:00.000-05:00

By Alex Seitz-Wald/Think Progress

Newt Gingrich launched a now-infamous tiradeagainst moderator Juan Williams during Monday night’s GOP debate after Williams dared to ask him if he could understand why some African-Americans were offended by Gingrich’s obsession with food stamps and child labor. “No, I don’t see that,” Gingrich sneered back.

Williams later insisted he wasn’t offended by Gingrich’s pointed defense, but did say his food stamps rhetoric is “very racial and…unless I missed it, black people haven’t been out there demanding food stamps, or marching for food stamps.”

Today, during a campaign stop in South Carolina, Gingrich recalled his exchange with Williams and used the same kind of suggestive language that Williams had objected to — this time directed at Williams himself:

GINGRICH: I had a very interesting dialogue Monday night in Myrtle Beach with Juan Williams about the idea of work, which seemed to Juan Williams to be a strange, distant concept.

Watch it:

Many pundits have seen racial undertones in Gingrich’s belittling of Williams during the debate. “That’s the way I like to spend my Martin Luther King, Jr. Day: watching Newt Gingrich sneer at Juan Williams, a black man, for having the temerity to ask him” a tough question, New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote.

Gingrich’s equally insulting assessment of the debate exchange likely won’t help.

Newt Gingrich’s Tax Plan Gives Newt Gingrich A $540,000 Tax Break

2012-01-20T20:23:00.000-05:00

By Tanya Somanader/Think Progress

In urging a reluctant Mitt Romney to finally release his tax returns, Newt Gingrich produced his own last night during the debate. His 2010 returns reveal an adjusted gross income of $3.1 million with an effective tax rate of almost 32 percent. That’s more than twice the rate that Romney said he pays — unless, of course, Gingrich gets his way.

Seeking to overhaul the U.S. tax code, Gingrich announced his plan last month to introduce a new, parallel tax system with what he calls a “flat” 15 percent rate. But as the Tax Policy Center notes, that plan would mean that millionaires would actually pay much lower tax rates than those below them on the income scale — millionaires like Newt Gingrich.

According to calculations by Center for American Progress Action Fund’s Seth Hanlon, Gingrich’s own tax plan would slash his effective tax rate from 31.6 percent down to 14.6 percent, right around where Romney sits comfortably under the existing code. That amounts to a $536,000 tax cut that Gingrich is proposing to give himself.

It is important to note that while Gingrich released his individual return as well as the one for his charitable foundation, he chose not to disclose the returns from his multiple business entities like Gingrich Holdings, which constitutes the primary source of his wealth. Together, they brought in $2.6 million for the Gingriches. Because his proposal includes business tax cuts as well, it is possible that his tax break would be even larger.

Meanwhile, middle-class families would pay significantly higher federal taxes than one-percenters like Gingrich and Romney. In fact, because Romney essentially admits he accruesnearly all of his wealth from investments, which are tax-free under Gingrich’s plan, Gingrich’s plan would allow Romney to pay almost no taxes at all.

And while Gingrich tries to sell his plan as a one that will “allow Americans the freedom to choose to file their taxes on a postcard,” middle-class families will have to do their taxes under the regular system and Gingrich’s system to see which actually affords them a better return.

Incidentally, that $500,000 windfall from his tax plan also happens to be the amount of credit Gingrich and his wife had at Tiffany and Co., the jewelry store. Whether to feed a high-end habit or provide a tax “choice” to American families, Gingrich definitely walks away from his tax plan a much richer man.

How The GOP Candidates Would Affect The People Of South Carolina, By The Numbers

2012-01-20T20:21:00.000-05:00

By Tanya Somanader/Think Progress

Tomorrow, South Carolina will hold its First in the South primary to determine the state’s pick for the GOP nomination. But while most of the state’s focus is on who people will be voting for, what about those who are actually doing the voting?

With the state’s unemployment rate well above the national average and more than 18 percent of residents living in poverty, economic securityis certainly a driving concern for the majority of voters. But, given the GOP field’s stances, it doesn’t seem to be a concern candidates are taking to heart.

Here’s a look at how the GOP candidates’ positions would affect the vulnerable populations of South Carolina, by the numbers:

–Over 3,000,000: There are at least at least 3,380,000 eligible voters in South Carolina, but many students, seniors, low-income voters, and minority voters may find it difficult to actually cast a ballot thanks to the state’s new voter ID law. Rick Santorum called it a “common-sense anti-fraud” measure that prevents the vote of “people who probably shouldn’t be voting.” Newt Gingrich blasted President Obama’s rejection of the law as trying to “steal elections.”

–Over 200,000: There are at least 213,000 unemployed South Carolinianscontributing to the state’s 9.9 percent unemployment rate. While those receiving unemployment insurance actually work harder to find a job, according to studies, Gingrich equates joblessness with laziness and demands that any benefits come through a work-training program — or a drug test.

–Over 400,000: There were at least 408,000 veterans living in South Carolina in 2009. veterans increasingly need to be treated for traumatic brain injury, PTSD, and other health consequences of war. While Mitt Romney briefly flirted with turning the VA into a voucher system, Gingrich adopted the idea wholesale, stating we should “find a way to have a voucherized system for those who want it.”

–Over 650,000: In 2009, there were over 650,000 people in the state participating in the food stamp program, and the economic recession has no doubt only increased those numbers. Rather than address the need of vulnerable South Carolinians, Gingrich and Santorum traffic in “ugly, racial stereotypes” to justify calls to drug test recipients and cut funding for the needy.