"Always" - Obama for America TV Ad (VIDEO)

"Tampered"

Back to business as normal...and what do you know? Mittens came out with another ad...and he lied in it...

...again.

"The Choice" - Obama For America TV Ad (VIDEO)

"Over the next four months you have a choice to make. Not just between two political parties or even two people. It's a choice between two very different plans for our country.

Governor Romney's plan would cut taxes for the folks at the very top, roll back regulations on big banks, and he says that if we do our economy will grow and everyone will benefit.

But you know what? We tried that top-down approach. It's what caused the mess in the first place.

I believe the only way to create an economy built to last is to strengthen the middle class. Asking the wealthy to pay a little more so we can pay down our debt in a balanced way. So that we can afford to invest in education, manufacturing, and homegrown American energy for good middle class jobs. Sometimes politics can seem very small. But the choice you face, it couldn't be bigger."

"Reverse" - Obama for America 2012 Television Ad (VIDEO)

"Succeed" Obama for America Ad (VIDEO)

Umm, is there a way @MSNBC can force Chris Matthews to watch his own Network and learn somethin'? (VIDEO)

First Chris Matthews had on E.J. Dionne and Susan Milligan, and barely let Susan get in a word in edgewise:

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

And then Lawrence O'Donnell had Mark Shields on to pontificate just a little bit more:

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

And yes, despite Lawrence's admonition, Mark Shields went on and on.

Unanswered was the question, in both segments was this: Why should the Catholic Church be able to enforce Catholic Dogma on it's employees who work for Catholic Organization who are not Catholic.

Instead all we heard was the alleged oppression being put upon the Church, which...if you remember history, is just a damn joke.

Another way to ask the question is: Why should the Catholic Church control the sex lives of Non-Catholic, or anyone else for that matter?


Or how about this one: Mad as I am about the Catholic Sex Scandal, I don't want to pay for Father Donovan's Heart Medication.  Can I have a exemption, too?  Or is it more important that we have a Civilization here, and pay for each other's stuff...even if we don't use it?

But finally buried in the din...was Rachel Maddow...and Rachel sounding uber-reasonable, and quiet, underhandedly scolding her journalistic colleages (namely Shields and Matthews).

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

And she did it again, the next night:

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

And Lawrence had an actual lawyer on (the legendary David Boies) to explain why the contretemps over the Birth Control issue was total bullshit:

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

Basically, I want two things from Chris Matthews...but expect only one.

It'd be really nice if stop hawking his book on Jack Kennedy every ten seconds, but hey a fella can dream, can't he?

But what I really expect is for Chris Matthews to stop using MSNBC as a personal platform to provide cover for the Church, of which he and I are members. He has not provided an impartial platform and instead used the network to flog and issue that is 110% bullshit.

Ethics, Chris. I thought they were important to Catholics. Maybe that's just lip service.

(Actually, as a Catholic, and knowing our history...yeah, it's lip service.)

Did Clint Eastwood just make a campaign ad for the President? (VIDEO)

First off, brilliant ad. But then Chrysler has been making brilliant stuff since their comeback.



Jamelle Bouie from the American Prospect:

[A]s befitting a car commercial, is that it focuses on the revitalization of Detroit as a template for pushing the country forward. This echoes language the president used in his State of the Union last month:

Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs.

We bet on American workers. We bet on American ingenuity. And tonight, the American auto industry is back.

Not only should you expect to hear more like this as the year continues, but don’t be surprised if the Obama campaign’s positive advertisements look and sound a lot like Chrysler’s.

The first Obama Campaign Ad, in case you missed it (VIDEO)

Running now in six swing states. Take THAT Turd Blossom!

New York Observer: How Jesse LaGreca kicked Fox's ass, even though they didn't show it on-air (VIDEO)

From the New York Observer:

Even if Geraldo Rivera was at the Zuccotti Park yesterday, Fox News has generally been a tad dismissive of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Foxnews.com (as of this writing) has no coverage of this national event on their front page stories. (Hard to imagine for a network that was so gung-ho about the Tea Party!) Red Eye‘s Bill Schulz went out to try to “prank” the protesters. Bill O’Reilly sent a producer minion out with the same mission: to belittle OWS’s cause by cutting up interviews to make people sound stupid.

Well, here is an interview that Fox News filmed, but doesn’t want you to see. The segment was shot on Wednesday for Greta van Susteren‘s show, (though it looks like the same producer from this O’Reilly segment questioning Michael Moore‘s anti-capitalist agenda) though the decision was made to leave it on the cutting room floor. The reason should be obvious pretty quickly.

The speaker giving Fox News the buisness is Jesse LaGreca, a vocal member of the Occupy Wall Street protests. This video comes courtesy of Kyle Christopher from OccupyWallSt.org‘s media team.

Now, no news organization is under obligation to air every interview they’ve filmed, especially when it makes them look bad. But you’d think that a “Fair and Balanced” network (that tells an interviewee that they are here to give them fair coverage to get any message they’d like to get out) would try to include at least a couple of opposing viewpoints to Mr. Shulz’s smarmy jokes or O’Reilly’s “infiltration” of the camp.

The ball is in your court, Fox.

Somebody book this guy on Lawrence tonight, or at least Olbermann or Rachel.

AFSCME: More Jobs Equal Less Debt (VIDEO)

Can't be posted (or seen on TV) enough:

Stephen Colbert: When in doubt, go with Muslim (VIDEO)

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Mitt Romney: "Let Detroit go Bankrupt" (VIDEO)

In any other world, a person like Mitt Romney would like to have this one back.  Instead, in today's Republican party, he's going to double-down on the notion.

But lest you forget:

Rachel Maddow sez "People who take Paul Ryan seriously, shouldn't be taken seriously..." (VIDEO)

Seriously, stop with the Smoochy-Smoochy.

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

Yeah, sure. She blew it on the GITMO story, but she's right here.

Anybody who slams the President over GITMO, and leaves out Congress, isn't worth your time. That includes you, Keith

It's a pity, because Keith did make an attempt at fairness by slamming New York, but he forgot to mention Congress's complicity in this decision, and that's a big deal.



It's not like Keith is under a Network's time constraints. He could have put it in there. It's not like he had a Producer saying "Hey, we have to trim five seconds off Worst Persons". So, the only excuses for Keith were that either he didn't want it in there, or he forgot.

Either way, bad call.

Do you think maybe it's time for MSNBC's Phil Griffin to be fired?

I have zero love for Joe Scarborough. But punishing him for something you didn't think was wrong until Keith Olbermann did it strikes me as painfully ridiculous.

MSNBC has suspended "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough for the same violation that took Keith Olbermann off the air earlier this month.

In a statement, MSNBC President Phil Griffin said he has suspended Scarborough for making political donations to candidates in Florida without seeking prior approval.

Fair is fair...I guess. But I am starting to wonder about Mr. Griffin's motives.  This all seems hyper-heavy-handed.  What makes a political donation made by a "reporter" (note the quotes) for a news organization less onerous by seeking "approval" for it?

Oh yeah, so the lawyers won't get suprised.

With that, I'll be sure to post Jon Stewart's Interview with the guy who wrote the book: "A World Without Lawyers" later today.

Rachel Maddow's Unedited Interview with Jon "I have the boubons" Stewart (VIDEO)

Jon was sick, so for about the first ten minutes, he's off his game. But he warms up as time goes on, and he did not throw up once during the interview. Kudos!

Keith's Statement to Countdown Fans...

It's very funny. You go looking for the Keith Olbermann's released statement, and you only can see parts of it in the various articles released here and there.

"A Statement to the Viewers of Countdown"

It actually took an hour or two before the statement was even linked to the Times story.

I wouldn't characterize this as a slamming of NBC, but I wouldn't call the wording gentle. If you're used to Keith's writing style, then it shouldn't come as a surprise to you. He laid out what happened. He didn't pull any punches, but he didn't twist any knives either.

The thorniest part of the missive was his saying that he was assured no suspension was going to happen...and then it happening anyway. I get the feeling that the story isn't over yet, and the next move, whatever it is...is going to be Keith's...and it's going to involve Lawyers.

Keith, for the record, this may be why Jon and Stephen said that the media sucks.

Steve Benen thinks the suspension is just as overly harsh as I do...

From Olbermann Suspended Indefinitely Without Pay:

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the personnel policies of NBC News, but if Politico's account is correct, Olbermann really did seem to break the network's rules. It appears to be a fairly minor infraction, but I suppose the host should have known better. A slap on the wrist, with a stern note about not doing it again, would probably be appropriate.

But an indefinite suspension without pay seems way over the top under the circumstances. We are, after all, talking about three checks -- one each for three candidates. As we talked about earlier, the MSNBC host's donations were made in his personal capacity; he disclosed his contributions; and he never encouraged others to support these campaigns.

As I understand it, the NBC News rule is intended to maintain a professional standard -- media professionals on the NBC News payroll are supposed to appear politically neutral. That's a noble intention. But the last time I checked, Keith Olbermann hosts a show with a point of view. His opinions are not only obvious, they're a key part of his program, which happens to be the highest rated on MSNBC.

As a "Countdown" viewer, I can say with confidence that I'm not surprised he cut a few checks for candidates he liked; I'm more surprised he didn't write more checks for other candidates he liked.

The network policy notes that the restrictions are necessary, because political activities may "jeopardize [employees'] standing as an impartial journalist." But therein lies the point -- those who watch Olbermann are well aware of his politics. Psst -- no one considers him "impartial."

Besides, if we're going to be sticklers for such things, I can't help but notice that Joe Scarborough has also contributed to like-minded candidates -- identified on his disclosure forms as an MSNBC host -- and Pat Buchanan has been writing some campaign checks, too. Neither faced suspension. (For the record, I don't think they should be punished, either.)

And just to reinforce the contrast, let's also remember that News Corp made multiple undisclosed donations to the Republican Governors Association, totaling at least $1.25 million, in addition to a $1 million contribution to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for its pro-Republican election-year activities. Fox News has helped GOP candidates raise money on the air; Fox News personalities are featured guests at Republican fundraisers; while other Fox News personalities continue to help generate financial support for Republican candidates now, even after the elections.

And Olbermann has been suspended indefinitely without pay for $7,200 in donations? Granted, NBC News and MSNBC are legitimate news outlets with professional standards News Corp and Fox News lack, but regardless, it's a reminder that today's punishment far exceeds his fairly inconsequential infractions.

Greg Sargent at the Washington Post thinks the suspension is just as fishy as I do...

Did Keith Olbermann even violate NBC policy?

Last time I checked, Keith Olbermann doesn't pretend to be an "impartial journalist."


Likewise, neither do Joe Scarborough or Pat Buchanan, both of whom have also given political contributions. It seems possible that none of these three would think they may have violated company policy.

Odder still, an anonymous NBC insider told Gawker that it's common knowledge within the organization that MSNBC's left-leaning personalities aren't necessarily required to follow NBC News rules. That makes sense, since MSNBC is pushing the envelope politically in a way NBC, obviously, isn't.

Again: We don't know yet what happened here. MSNBC's P.R. department is not responding to inquiries about whether Scarborough or Buchanan notified MSNBC brass before making their contributions. But it's certainly fair to ask, if they're axing Olbermann.

The fact that it's not even crystal clear that Olbermann violated NBC policy suggests that this firing could be a pretext for getting rid of him because he has difficult relations with management, or worse, because MSNBC is terrified of critics who claim it's becoming the lefty version of Fox News.

Until we learn more, the network's case against Olbermann is looking increasingly tenuous.

Randi Rhodes said it flat out on air. Comcast is buying out NBC/Universal. Comcast could be looking at doing some cost-cutting, so all of this could be a bit of a negotiation.

Keith Olbermann just got suspended, and the reasoning a little shaky.

I've had a lot of problems with Keith over the last couple of months, but I think MSNBC really screwed the pooch on this one.  I have the feeling its about Keith giving money to politicians he's interviewed.

And Huffington Post is telling me I'm right:

MSNBC has suspended star anchor Keith Olbermann following the news that he had donated to three Democratic candidates this election cycle.

"I became aware of Keith's political contributions late last night. Mindful of NBC News policy and standards, I have suspended him indefinitely without pay," MSNBC president Phil Griffin said in a statement.

Politico reported Friday that Olbermann had donated $2,400 each to Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, and to Kentucky Senate contender Jack Conway. While NBC News policy does not prohibit employees from donating to political candidates, it requires them to obtain prior approval from NBC News executives before doing so.

In a statement earlier Friday, Olbermann defended his donation, saying, "I did not privately or publicly encourage anyone else to donate to these campaigns nor to any others in this election or any previous ones, nor have I previously donated to any political campaign at any level."

Griffin's statement underscores that it was Olbermann's failure to obtain approval, and not the actual political donations, that prompted the suspension.

The move is doubly significant in that it represents a major development in the relationship between Griffin and Olbermann, who once told the New Yorker, "Phil thinks he's my boss."

"Keith doesn't run the show," Griffin told New York Magazine recently. "I do a lot of things he doesn't like. I do a lot of things he does."

I'm sorry, but this looks and smells bad coming off the climate we're coming out of.

Why a full suspension, a punishment usually merited for people who have been accused of crimes, instead of a public rebuke.

Is this MSNBC's way of trying to slap down Keith to prove how neutral they are to the incoming Congress? Not saying that's how it is, but I would bet that the Professional Left is going to have a field day with this, and MSNBC has no one but themselves to blame.