The Rumble 2012: Bill O’Reilly vs Jon Stewart (Full)

[youtube http://youtu.be/A051B-uPopM?]

The Rumble 2012 – “Daily Show” funnyman Jon Stewart and Fox News host Bill O’Reilly faced off in a debate Saturday tonight at the Lisner Auditorium on the campus of George Washington University in Washington, D.C. Viewers can watch the event. dubbed “O’Reilly v Stewart 2012: The Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium” streaming on the web at therumble2012.com.

Starting at 8 p.m. ET, we’ll be live blogging every jab, joke, and smart-aleck remark with this live blog. Join the conversation and leave your thoughts in the comments.

WASHINGTON (AP) — There were all the trappings of a high-octane presidential debate: the over-the-top declarations, the pre-practiced zingers and the schmaltzy appeals to America’s truest values. But the presidential candidates were nowhere to be found.
In their place Saturday were two celebrity gabbers who have claimed their stakes to the polar opposite ends of the political spectrum: Bill O’Reilly and Jon Stewart. The political odd-couple came to Washington ready to tangle in an event mockingly dubbed “The Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium.”
Choice words not suitable for the faint of heart dotted the 90-minute exchange between the Fox News anchor and the star of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” who bantered aggressively but good-naturedly over birth control, President George W. Bush and the so-called “War on Christmas.”
Stewart came prepped with a mechanical pedestal he used to elevate himself in the air, making the height-challenged comedian appear taller than the lanky O’Reilly when he wanted to drive a point home.
“I like you much better that way,” O’Reilly quipped at one point as he gazed up at his ideological foe.
The political feud between the two caffeinated TV personalities dates back more than a decade. Much like family members who just can’t resist pushing each other’s buttons over Thanksgiving stuffing, Stewart and O’Reilly love to disagree, but appear to hold nothing against each other once the latest spat has run its course. The two have appeared on each other’s programs since 2001, but the face-off Saturday at The George Washington University marked their first head-to-head debate.
Appearing wholly presidential in dark jackets and face makeup under a sign reading “Yum, this banner tastes like freedom,” the two quickly turned to talk of government spending and the 47 percent of Americans that Republican Mitt Romney said in a video are dependent on government.
Stewart, defending government involvement in health care and social programs, said the U.S. has always been an entitlement nation.
“We are a people that went to another country, saw other people on it and said, ‘Yea, we want that,” Stewart said. “Have you ever seen ‘Oprah’s favorite things’ episode?”
Asked who he’d like to see as president, O’Reilly dead-panned: “I’d have to say Clint Eastwood.”
“Well why don’t we ask him,” said Stewart, mocking the Hollywood actor’s widely panned speech in August at the Republican National Convention by getting out of his chair and staring at it while the crowd erupted in laughter.
In an apparent show of bipartisanship, Stewart even got on O’Reilly lap at one point. “And what would you like for Christmas, little boy?” O’Reilly said slyly.
“The display that you saw tonight is why America is America. Robust, creative, no holds barred,” O’Reilly told reporters after the debate. “You can call it whatever you want, but you wouldn’t see this in a lot of other countries. That’s for sure.”
Organizers said about 1,500 people attended the event, but the main audience was intended to be online, where the event was live-streamed for $4.95. On Twitter, viewers complained they missed the event when the video servers crashed. Organizers said video will be available for download and that those who experienced errors will be eligible for a refund.

October 7, 2012 0

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Woman defaces ‘anti-jihad’ ad in Times Square station

By BRIAN STILLMAN, GEORGETT ROBERTS, JENNIFER FERMINO and DAVID K. LI
Last Updated: 10:28 PM, September 25, 2012
Posted: 7:13 PM, September 25, 2012

Cops busted a lone protester — angry with subway ads equating enemies of Israel as “savages” — as she spray-painted over one of the controversial signs today.

A Post camera crew captured the bizarre conflict between suspect Mona Eltahawy, 45, and a woman defending the ads.

see videos here

“Mona, do you think you have the right to do this?” said Pamela Hall, holding a mounted camera as she tried to block the barrage of spray paint.

“I do actually,” Eltahawy calmly responded. “I think this is freedom of expression, just as this is freedom of expression.”

Hall then thrusts herself between Eltahawy’s spray paint and the poster.

Eltahawy — an activist who has appeared on MSNBC and CNN — engaged her in an odd cat-and-mouse dance, spraying pink every time she had an opening.

“What right do you have to violate free speech,” Hall pleaded.

“I’m not violating it. I’m making an expression on free speech,” an increasingly agitated Eltahawy shot back.

“You do not have the right!” Hall said.

see videos here

“I do actually and I’m doing it right now and you should get out of the way! Do you want paint on yourself,” Eltahawy shot ack

As the poster defender bobbed and weaved to get in the paint’s way, Eltahawy mocked: “That’s right, defend racism.”

Finally an MTA police officer and an NYPD cop came to scene and arrested Eltahawy.

“This is non-violent protest, see this America!” she said as cops cuffed her. “I’m an Egyptian-American and I refuse hate.”

The MTA was forced to install the controversial ad campaign by court order.

The 46- by 30-inch ads are plastered in 10 Manhattan stations, including busy Grand Central and Times Square Stations.

The American Freedom Defense Initiative, a pro-Israel group spearheaded by activist Pamela Geller, paid $6,000 for the ad space.

September 26, 2012 0

History Repeats Itself as Tragedy

The must-read secret Pentagon memo on Syria’s 1982 massacre.

BY TOM BLANTON | SEPTEMBER 21, 2012

Cut the dates from this just-declassified Defense Intelligence Agency paper and it reads like an analysis of the current 18-month-old Syrian civil war, as if it could have gone to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta yesterday. But DIA analysts wrote this paper in April 1982, 30 years ago — just after the horrific Hama massacre by then-Syrian leader Hafez Assad, who used jets and artillery to level the city and wipe out a Muslim Brotherhood-led uprising.

About the Hama massacre, the DIA analysts concluded:

The Muslim Brotherhood leadership was fully aware that they had the Assad regime in a ‘no win’ situation over Hama. If Assad had not acted forcefully against Hama, the rebellion might have spread to other cities which in turn might have led to a full-scale rebellion. Assad’s liberal use of artillery in breaking the resistance in Hama served notice to other cities that he has both the will and the means to retain power. By the same token, however, the government’s actions have appalled and sickened a wide spectrum of Syrian society. Nonetheless, Assad’s strategy continues to be based on the realization that most Syrians, regardless of their differences with the present government, do not want the Muslim Brotherhood in power, although they would undoubtedly prefer one dominated by Sunni Muslims [instead of Assad’s Alawite sect].

The one factual discrepancy in this DIA report, compared to what we know now, is the casualty count on Hama. The document says 2,000 dead, but independent observers (ranging from the British journalist Robert Fisk, who visited Hama, to the Syrian Human Rights Committee) determined after the fact that between 20,000 and 40,000 died at Hama — all killed in the month of February 1982, within just a few weeks.

The Syrian civil war currently raging has only now reached that level of casualties, nearly 30,000 total deaths over 18 months, according to the Centre for Documentation of Violations in Syria and the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. August 2012 was the bloodiest month, with more than 5,000 deaths. Most of the Syrian dead are civilian; the total includes about 3,000 fighters on each side.

Read More…

September 22, 2012 0

Actual Democalypse 2012 – Conservatives Rethink Middle Eastern Democracy

CLICK ON IMAGE

September 21, 2012 0

Romney Apologizes To Nation’s 150 Million ‘Starving, Filthy Beggars’

SEPTEMBER 18, 2012 | ISSUE 48•38 | MORE NEWS

SALT LAKE CITY—Seeking to limit the fallout from a videotaped speech in which he asserts 47 percent of Americans “pay no taxes” and do not take “personal responsibility and care for their lives,” Mitt Romney hastily called a press conference today to apologize personally to the “150 million starving, filthy beggars [he] might have offended.”

Saying that he deeply regretted his choice of words at a private $50,000-a-plate fundraising function in May—during which he argued “[his] job is not to worry” about the lower-earning half of the nation’s populace—Romney personally appealed to the country’s “dirt-caked garbage pickers and toothless street urchins” for forgiveness.

“First and foremost, I would like to offer a heartfelt apology to all the whores, junkies, bums, and grime-covered derelicts out there who make up nearly half our nation,” a visibly contrite and solemn Romney said outside a campaign stop at a local high school. “Let me assure you that I in no way meant to offend any of the putrid-smelling, barefoot masses out there. My campaign is not about dividing this nation, but about bringing all sides together—the rich, elegant members of the upper class, as well as the 47 percent who are covered in flies and eat directly from back-alley dumpsters.”

“I am fully committed to building a better future for every American,” Romney continued, “and that means ensuring all 150 million grease-and-urine-soaked members of our society get a fair shake.”

The Romney campaign reportedly scrambled into damage-control mode after the video leaked Monday, issuing a statement late last night stating that the intended target of Romney’s remarks was ingrained big-government largesse, not the “hordes of uneducated, loathsome scum who unfortunately populate this country.”

However, with Romney’s comments continuing to dominate the news cycle today, the campaign opted to convene a press event to allow Romney to speak directly to the nation’s “grimy panhandlers and coke-addled whores” so that he could issue an apology and explain his familiarity with their struggles.

“I know just how hard it must be to get through a miserable, destitute life that is rife with crying babies whose shrieks consistently disrupt the affluent members of society who actually contribute something to this world,” said the GOP candidate, adding that he wanted to make amends for his recent statements and reach out to what he called the country’s “snaggle-toothed street people” and “hell-spawned savages.” “I know it can be challenging to wake each morning, covered in your own feces and refuse, and get back out there on the streets to beg for spare change and food scraps, always one step from dying right there in an alley.”

“I know your challenges, and I am ready to fight for you,” he added

Romney also said he recognized that the hardships of the nation’s low-earners are made more difficult by the fact that so “very, very many of them are drug-addicted, high-school-dropout single mothers and fathers who sleep in gutters while sewer rats nibble at their necrotic flesh.”

In an effort to right his campaign and rebuild his image, Romney promised to bring his message of compassion and economic opportunity to the “ramshackle, mud-floored huts” in which half of all U.S. residents live.

“Let me make this absolutely clear: I have the utmost respect for all of the filth-encrusted, lesion-covered degenerates of this nation,” Romney said. “In the coming weeks, I look forward to meeting real Americans in their squalid, roach-infested hellholes in every corner of this country. I promise to stand up for every one of you, even the 47 percent of you huddled together for warmth, fighting your own family members for moldy crusts of bread as you wallow in your own excrement.”

Added Romney, “And I look forward to serving you as your next president.”

source

September 19, 2012 1

Why I Booed Jerusalem

by Alex Yudelson Sep 10, 2012 9:45 AM EDT

For one day last week, the Democratic Party appeared to stake out a novel—yet very reasonable—position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A college student from George Washington University, I was among the youngest delegates at the convention. On Tuesday, we voted to approve our platform without the usual—and hollow—promise to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

By Wednesday afternoon, however, chaos ensued in Charlotte after party officials sought to insert a plank into the platform establishing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. In what was surely the most awkward moment of the convention, delegates voted three times on the late additions. Even when it was clear the “ayes” didn’t have the required two-thirds majority by the third round, convention chair L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa adopted the resolution anyway.

DNC Chair Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa speaks on stage. (Kevork Djansezian / Getty Images)

During the voice vote for the amendment, a fellow delegate from New York sitting next to me at the Time Warner Cable Arena wildly shouted “Aye!” all three times. After the mostly negative reaction to the result—many delegates, including myself, booed—I asked him why he voted for the change. His response: “I don’t know.”

The moment epitomized for me the absence of level-headed and intelligent political discourse about Israel. On so many issues, President Obama and Mitt Romney stake out diametrically opposed positions, providing voters with a stark choice. But not when it comes to Israel.

The same dynamic has plagued these issues for years: too many Democrats blindly support Israel, allowing Republicans to gain traction by attacking those of us who urge more nuanced policy positions. Last week, Republicans said delegates like me who voted “no” on the changes hate God and Israel.

That couldn’t be farther from the truth. After all, I am myself Jewish. But before supporting Israel, I support peace. The language inserted into Democratic platform does at best nothing to improve the chances for a future two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And if the addition of meaningless wording that could harm the prospects for peace was disappointing, the plank’s undemocratic insertion into the platform was downright disturbing. The platform deserved the wrath it incurred.

Most supporters of an equitable two-state solution see Jerusalem as a final-status issue that must be resolved in direct negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis. A divided Jerusalem has been widely recognized by American and Israeli leaders as essential to a two-state solution, with a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem and Israeli sovereignty over West Jerusalem. Even Israel’s current right-wing prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has said (sometimes) that Jerusalem will be a subject for peace negotiations.

That’s why no U.S. presidents, including Republican administrations, have recognized Israeli sovereignty over the ancient city and the world’s embassies remain based in Tel Aviv. Yet both parties always make empty campaign promises of moves toward recognition.

So why did the Democratic Party continue this destructive charade? Post-truth politics dominate our debates today on so many issues—especially this one. Rhetoric overwhelms public discourse at the exclusion of substance. When Obama repeatedly gives Israel unprecedented assurances and security aid, Mitt Romney can still state that Obama “threw Israel under the bus,” and a large swath of the population will actually believe it.

Instead of having a real discussion, the Democratic Party succumbed to criticism from the right. We adopted a resolution that is situated to the right of the position George W. Bush held when in office (despite his own platform pledges). The position ignores even the possibility of a divided Jerusalem, let alone what many see as its inevitability.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, recently said that “there has never been and will never be daylight between the two parties” when it comes to Israel. That’s precisely the problem.

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

Alex Yudelson is a junior at George Washington University where he studies philosophy and political science. He is a member of the College Democrats and, in 2012, served as a National Convention delegate from New York’s 29th Congressional District. Alex hails from Rochester, New York.

For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

source : http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/10/why-i-booed-jerusalem.html

September 11, 2012 0

More on the undemocratic vote

See On Democracy Now

Controversy erupted at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday when party leaders forced through a platform change to reinstate references to God and the view that Jerusalem is Israel’s undivided capital. The language in question was included in 2008, but was left out when delegates approved their 2012 platform earlier this week. Following criticism from Republicans, DNC chair and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa presided over a voice vote to reinstate the references through a two-thirds majority. Villaraigosa appeared prepared to automatically accept the change, but those voting “no” were so loud that he ended up holding the vote three times. The recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s undivided capital stands in contrast to longstanding U.S. government policy, which calls for the city’s status to be resolved through negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel has occupied East Jerusalem since 1967

September 7, 2012 0

A democrat (undemocratic) vote

[youtube http://youtu.be/09cEwnivdr0?]

Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. Do you hear a 2/3 majority here ?

September 6, 2012 0

Ahead of Charlotte DNC, Hundreds Protest Corporate Giants in “March on Wall Street South”

The Democratic National Convention opens today in Charlotte, North Carolina, bringing more than 35,000 delegates, journalists and activists to the nation’s second-largest financial…
Grassroots Leader Rev. Dr. William Barber on the Fight for Voting, Civil Rights in North Carolina

Early voting begins in North Carolina on Thursday, nearly two months before Election Day. Once again, the state is seen as a key battleground state. In 2008, President Obama won the state…
Baldemar Velásquez Draws on Years of Farm Worker Organizing to Continue Struggle in Anti-Union South

Baldemar Velásquez, founder and president of the Farm Labor Organizing Committee of the AFL-CIO, has been organizing migrant workers since he worked with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in the…
Bright Lights of Charlotte’s DNC Cast Shadow Over City’s Poor and Marginalized

In the shadow of the world headquarters of Bank of America and the media frenzy surrounding the Democratic National Convention, we look at a side of Charlotte you will not see this week in…
Diverse Causes Join Forces in Charlotte to Kick Off Week of Protests at DNC

On Sunday, ahead of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, more than 1,000 people gathered for a March on Wall Street South. Before the march kicked off, speakers from organizations…
Why Did the Dems Choose Charlotte? Examining Obama’s Close Ties to Utility Giant Duke Energy

Duke Energy, the nation’s largest utility, has played a major role in bringing the Democratic National Convention to Charlotte, North Carolina. Duke has a lot riding on future policies…
No Papers, No Fear: Busload of Undocumented Immigrants Defy Risks to Bring Message to DNC