Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Friday, October 7, 2011

Video: Captivating Exchange between Lawrence O'Donnell and Herman Cain

On one side is MSNBC's resident Marxist, Lawrence O'Donnell. On the other side is Herman Cain at a Barnes & Noble while promoting his book. It's an interview wrought with 'gotcha' questions but Cain does very well at diffusing them. One of the more contentious exchanges involved O'Donnell attempting to admonish Cain for the latter's refusal to get involved in the civil rights movement during his college days. O'Donnell's treading on thin ice with that line of questioning because by doing so, he diminishes the persecution Cain had to go through.

Cain won this one. The only thing that would have made it better would have been his pointing out that the racists of the 1960's were overwhelmingly Democrat.

Via MoxNews:

Video: CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson on O'Reilly Factor

Bill O'Reilly appears to be taking an increased interest in the Fast and Furious scandal, if his coverage this week is any indication. In this exchange, he interviews CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson, who is the one mainstream news reporter who has been on the story since practically Day 1. Attkisson released memos and e-mails earlier this week that call Eric Holder's May 3rd testimony before the House Judiciary Committee into question. That's only part of the story and not what prompted O'Reilly to have her on his show.

After the documents were released, Attkisson appeared on Laura Ingraham's radio show and conveyed to Ingraham that when she reached out to Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler to get a statement, she was subsequently yelled at. She then confessed that a White House spokesman named Eric Schultz 'screamed' at her, saying that she was the only 'unreasonable' reporter he had to deal with on the developing Fast and Furious scandal. Based on this exchange with O'Reilly, Attkisson gives the impression that she regrets opening that can of worms with Ingraham. Her answer seems to indicate that she doesn't want so completely tee-off the administration that another stonewall goes up.

Perhaps she's starting to feel real pressure from the administration as well. It's hard to say but there's no getting around the fact that what she told Ingraham on radio is making serious waves. Reports are that she has been inundated with interview requests. Her inclination may be to think she did wrong but based on the frenzy that may be about to ensue, it may have been the best thing she could have done.

Anyway, here's the interview.

h/t Hapblog

Harry Reid Uses the Nuclear Option

You might have to read the specifics of what happened multiple times, before you understand exactly what happened here (I did) but suffice it to say that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has decided to go to the mat with a 'Nuclear Option' that serves to completely re-write the rules of the Senate. And guess what? Obama's jobs bill is at the root of it all. To sum up, Harry Reid so wants to avoid a vote on the latest Obama monstrosity, that he has pushed the button to prevent that vote from taking place. In reality, he should be mad at Obama but he seems to be so far off the rails that he's taking it out on the Republicans and shooting future Democratic Senators in the collective foot.

H/T to Hot Air for providing a link to perhaps the best, easiest to understand explanation for what happened, via Philip Klein at Beltway Confidential:
In a stunning turn of events this evening, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., used an arcane legislative maneuver to effectively rewrite Senate rules to make it harder for the minority party to force uncomfortable votes on the majority.

The buildup to this point started on Tuesday, when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., tried to force a vote on President Obama's jobs bill as well as other Republican priorities by offering them as amendments to the China currency bill. Reid blocked the move.

Tonight, McConnell made what's called a "motion to suspend the rules," to allow a vote on the amendments. Such motions are almost always defeated, because they require a two-thirds majority to pass. But they're another way for the minority party to force uncomfortable votes. Even though the minority party doesn't get a direct vote on the amendment, how somebody votes on the motion becomes a sort of proxy for such a vote. In this case, for instance, if Democrats had voted down a motion for a vote on Obama's jobs bill, it would have put them in an awkward spot.

Though it's been the standing practice of the Senate to allow such motions by the minority, tonight Reid broke with precedent and ruled McConnell's motion out of order, and was ultimately backed up by Democrats.
Klein closes by saying this isn't a 'nuclear option' because it doesn't deal with filibusters; it deals with the amendment process. Nonetheless, it's certainly in the same spirit and it certainly changes the Senate rules.

It is fascinating, however, that the reason Harry Reid has gone to such lengths is the result of his unwillingness to allow his party to vote on a Bill supported by the POTUS, who is a member OF that party. This is shocking on many levels. This is prideful anger on display. Reid is too blinded by that anger to even realize that Obama's the source of it. Nonetheless, he's directing it at the Republicans.

Tangentially speaking, I'm waiting with bated breath to hear what John McCain thinks about this. Back in 2005, he was the Republican who led the infamous 'gang of 14' to prevent a Republican nuclear option involving the filibustering of judicial appointments, which was far more warranted. Appointments are supposed to get the 'advice and consent' of congress, not death by filibuster.

Hot Air has more.

Video: Obama Stands By Holder on Fast and Furious

It's become obvious that Barack Obama is going to stand by Attorney General Eric Holder when it comes to Fast and Furious. In light of what has become known about Holder's role in the scandal and the latter's inconsistent testimony about when he first heard of the operation, Obama's role in the operation should become more suspect. Back in March, when interviewing with Jorge Ramos at Univision, Obama said neither he nor Eric Holder authorized Fast and Furious. After documents were released this week, Holder may have committed perjury. At yesterday's news conference, Obama made a slight adjustment to that assertion. In March, he said forthrightly that Holder didn't authorize it. Here, he says that Holder 'indicated he was not aware' of the operation. Obama also took it a step further and said he (Obama) didn't know about it.

Another thing to watch for here is that Obama said both he and Holder would have been 'very unhappy' with whoever authorized it. At minimum, they should know who that is by now. It's been known for several months now that it was made by someone above ATF Director at the time, Kenneth Melson. That certainly narrows the field. For someone who would have been 'very unhappy,' it's certainly taking a long time to find the source of that unhappiness. The memos sent to Holder came directly from Asst Attorney General Lanny Breuer. If Holder's pleading ignorance, Breuer seems to be the person to target at this point.

Via CBS:

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive