Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation Donates Again To The Republican Governors Association: $250,000
Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation Donates Again To The Republican Governors Association: $250,000
In June, Fox News’ parent company News Corporation gave a $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association. This evening, IRS disclosures reveal that News Corporation gave another check, time for $250,000, bringing his total donation amount to $1,250,000. Other donors include Bill Koch, who donated $100,000, Swift Boat-funder Bob Perry, who gave $3.5 million, and right-wing casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who gave $1 million to the Republican campaign group.
News Corporation chief Rupert Murdoch recently stated that he directed his company’s donation in order to help his friend John Kasich, the Republican nominee for governor in Ohio. As ThinkProgress’ Ian Millhiser noted, there actually are laws against corporate managers treating a publicly-traded corporation as if it were their own personal bank account. Although News Corporation was founded in Australia, it was recently reincorporated in Delaware and thus must comply with key Delaware court decisions. Significantly, the Delaware Supreme Court determined over 70 years ago that “[c]orporate officers and directors are not permitted to use their position of trust and confidence to further their private interests.”
- Comments
- View Comments
Glenn Beck Brings ExxonMobil-Linked Religious Front Group To Tell Christians Not To Believe In Climate Change
Glenn Beck Brings ExxonMobil-Linked Religious Front Group To Tell Christians Not To Believe In Climate Change
In June, ThinkProgress published an exclusive investigation into the Cornwall Alliance — a corporate front designed to deceive evangelicals into doubting the science underpinning climate change. Today, Fox News hate-talker Glenn Beck brought on a representative from the group to tout Cornwall’s new DVD, “Resisting the Green Dragon,” which claims the climate change movement is a “false religion,” and a nefarious conspiracy to empower eugenicists and create a “global government.” The DVD, which Cornwall is distributing to evangelical churches around the country, seems to be designed perfectly for Beck’s world view, and unsurprisingly, the Cornwall guest and Beck exchanged bizarre conspiracy theories. Watch it:
The Cornwall Alliance appears to be a creation of a group called the James Partnership, a nonprofit run by Chris Rogers and Peter Stein, according to documents filed with the Virginia State Corporation Commission. Rogers, who heads a media and public relations firm called CDR Communications, collaborates with longtime oil front group operative David Rothbard, the founder and President of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and Jacques Villarreal, a lower level staffer at CFACT, for his James Partnership group. In the past, Rogers’ firm has worked for the Bush administration and for the secretive conservative planning group, the Council for National Policy.
According to public records, the following entities are all registered to the same address, 9302-C Old Keene Mill Road Burke, VA 22015, an office park in suburban Virginia:
– Rogers’ consulting firm, CDR Communications
– Rogers’ nonprofit hub, the James Partnership
– The Cornwall Alliance
– The new “Resisting the Green Dragon” website
In late 2005, evangelical leaders like Rick Warren joined a drive to back a major initiative to fight global warming, saying “millions of people could die in this century because of climate change, most of them our poorest global neighbors.” To counter this historic shift in the evangelical community, a group called the “Interfaith Stewardship Alliance” (ISA) was launched to oppose action on carbon emissions and to deny the existence of climate chance. One of the men guiding this group was Paul Driessen, a consultant for ExxonMobil, the mining industry, and for CFACT.
For “stream lining” reasons, ISA relaunched as the Cornwall Alliance in 2006. With the new name came a redesigned website, highly produced web videos, and an organized network of churches to distribute climate change denying propaganda to hundreds of pastors around the country. The branding for the Cornwall Alliance is derived from the “Cornwall Declaration,” a 1999 document pushing back against the creation-care movement in the evangelical community. The Declaration “stressed a free-market environmental stewardship and emphasized that individuals and private organizations should be trusted to care for their own property without government intervention.” CFACT President Rothbard has been hailed as the “driving force” behind the Cornwall Declaration public relations effort.
CFACT is a gimmicky right-wing organization that does everything it can to try to discredit the science underpinning climate change. For instance, staffers from the group traveled to the Copenhagen conference on climate change to stage silly press conferences with Rush Limbaugh’s former producer and stunts aimed at mocking Greenpeace.
Vitter And Angle Ads Featuring Race-Baiting Image Removed From YouTube, Photographer Speaks Out
Vitter And Angle Ads Featuring Race-Baiting Image Removed From YouTube, Photographer Speaks Out
Last week, ThinkProgress broke the news that both senatorial candidates Sharron Angle (R-NV) and Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) used the same racially-tinged image in separate attack ads against their opponents and described the subjects in the photo as “illegal aliens.” Besides invoking offensive anti-Latino stereotypes, the photographer of the photo, Chris Floyd, later informed the Washington Post that the “illegal aliens” in the picture were actually Mexicans still in Mexico.
Now it appears both ads have been removed from YouTube. Vitter’s is marked as “private,” and Angle’s video has been pulled down due to a “copyright claim by Getty Images, Inc.”
In a phone interview with ThinkProgress, Floyd indicated that he’s still waiting to hear himself what, if any, legal actions Getty Images is pursuing. Floyd explained that he has a contract with Getty which means that they have the “first right to pursue legal action in the event of a copyright violation.”
However, Floyd did seem confident that the Angle and Vitter campaigns are at the very least morally, if not legally, culpable:
I think this is a question of principle. The only legal place they could’ve obtained that image [on the Getty Images website] clearly printed out that the people in the photo were not illegal aliens, but Mexicans in Mexico. That means they either purposefully deceived their audience or they stole the photo from somewhere else.
Whether it was done intentionally or not, Floyd maintains that “they [the Vitter and Angle campaigns] completely distorted the reality of my photo.”
Floyd also expressed concern over how the improper use of the photo could reflect on him. “Someone might see my photo and say ‘that guy [Floyd] is clearly not an impartial and informed photojournalist, he’s just trying to further his own extremist agenda.’” However, that is certainly not the case. “I just want to be able to do my work in a way that’s fair and balanced,” said Floyd.
Getty Images did not immediately respond to ThinkProgress’ request for comment. However, the company’s editorial policy, as printed on their website, reads, “We believe that photographs are the visual communication of a story and should be held to an equal level of accountability, responsibility and integrity as the written word in journalism. Images illustrate and reflect the events of our world today and therefore have a responsibility to be delivered to the customer with accuracy and impartiality.”
Toomey Blames Country’s Economic Woes On Progressive Legislation That Hasn’t Even Passed Yet
Toomey Blames Country’s Economic Woes On Progressive Legislation That Hasn’t Even Passed Yet
GOP U.S. Senate candidate Pat Toomey (PA) attended a rally at the Middletown Grange Fairgrounds Wednesday, joining Republicans running for many other local offices to speak about his views on a wide range of issues.
At one point, Toomey explained what he thinks ails the economy. He claims his Democratic Party opponents have done “serious damage” to the U.S. economy, and then asks the audience to “think of what we’ve witnessed in the last 18 months or so.” Toomey then listed off a series of legislative actions, including “serial bailouts of failing companies” and “spending money on a scale we’ve never seen before.” At the end of his list, he concluded, “You add in cap and trade, card check, government-run health care, is it any wonder we haven’t had an economic recovery? Is it any wonder we haven’t had growth? How hard is this to figure out?”:
TOOMEY: But they’re doing some serious damage. If you think of what we’ve witnessed in just the last 18 months or so, serial bailouts of failing companies, nationalizing whole industries, spending money on a scale we’ve never seen before, deficits and debts that are completely unsustainable, you add in cap and trade, card check, government-run health care, is it any wonder we haven’t had an economic recovery? Is it any wonder we don’t have job growth? How hard is this to figure out?
Watch it:
The problem with Toomey’s list is that it includes bills that haven’t even been legisated into law yet. “Government-run health care” presumably refers to the health law passed this past spring by Congress, but the legislation that Toomey is referring to as “cap and trade” and “card check” haven’t even gotten close to getting the votes they need to be made into law. “Cap and trade” refers to the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which, while narrowly passing the House of Representatives in 2009, is widely considered to be dead in the U.S. Senate. “Card check” refers to a provision in the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that would allow workers to form a union if they could get half the workers to sign a card stating their intention to organize. Despite being a top priority of the country’s labor movement, EFCA has been in limbo for years, and the card check provision is widely considered to be unable to garner enough votes to pass, and is likely dead.
If Toomey is resorting to blaming the lack of job growth on legislation that hasn’t even passed yet, economics and basic political facts must indeed by very “hard” for him to “figure out.”
Hannity Expresses His ‘Hope’ That New Health Care Reform Law Bankrupts America
Hannity Expresses His ‘Hope’ That New Health Care Reform Law Bankrupts America
Fox News host Sean Hannity talked with former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle last night about his new book, “Getting It Done,” which chronicles Congress’s path to passing health care reform. Hannity of course attacked the new law throughout the interview with well-worn GOP talking points. But in a Rush Limbaugh-esque moment, the Fox News host actually said he hopes that the new reform law bankrupts the country — just so he can say he was right about it:
HANNITY: Seems to me like we’re headed for bankruptcy in this bill. That’s my prediction 40 years down the line. So we’ll see who’s right.
DASCHLE: We’ll wager a bet, Sean.
HANNITY: All right. I hope I’m right just for the sake of principle.
Watch it:
The Congressional Budget Office’s most recent score of the health care law found that it will produce “$143 billion in net budgetary savings over the 2010-2019 period.”
Local Chamber of Commerce Won’t Endorse U.S. Chamber Ads
Local Chamber of Commerce Won’t Endorse U.S. Chamber Ads
In Virginia’s fifth Congressional district, Democratic incumbent Tom Perriello has faced an onslaught of attack ads funded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. One such ad implored voters: “Government run health care. Medicare cuts. Have you had enough? Tell Congressman Perriello, stop hurting Virginia families.” As ThinkProgress reported, it’s possible that the Chamber’s attack ads are being funded by foreign money; the Chamber has yet to disclose who, exactly, funds its attack ads.
The Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce is located in Perriello’s district, and pays dues to the U.S. Chamber, though it is an otherwise separate and independent operation. When contacted by a local news outlet, the Regional Chamber’s President, Tim Hulbert made it clear that his group does not engage in such political activities:
The Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce has no part in that. It’s Hulbert who says politics is not in the group’s DNA, and while it shares the same last name with the national organization, they are separate and independent of one another.
“Our chamber has never been involved in any kind of partisan political activity at least for 30 years and I wouldn’t be surprised for our entire 97 years of existence,” said Hulbert.
In an interview with ThinkProgress, Hulbert declined to endorse both the U.S. Chamber’s ad campaign and the content of the ads. “It’s First Amendment. We all get to engage in the political process in whatever fashion we choose, and that’s the fashion they choose,” he said. As to whether he thought the ad’s content was fair, Hulbert said, “What I think is not relevant.”
Fox Host Brian Kilmeade Says ‘All Terrorists Are Muslim’ In Defense Of O’Reilly’s ‘Muslims Killed Us’ Remark
Fox Host Brian Kilmeade Says ‘All Terrorists Are Muslim’ In Defense Of O’Reilly’s ‘Muslims Killed Us’ Remark
Yesterday on The View, Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar stormed off the set after Fox News pundit Bill O’Reilly slammed the Park 51 proposal because “Muslims killed us on 9/11!” The Fox News network quickly came to his defense, with Fox contributor Andrea Tantaros assuring Fox News host Megyn Kelly that “O’Reilly came on the show armed with facts. He came from a position of strength, he had numbers to back it up.”
This morning, Fox and Friends Brian Kilmeade criticized Goldberg and Behar for not being able to handle “a debate on training wheels.” As if to offer a serious defense of O’Reilly’s “facts,” Kilmeade stated that “not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims”:
KILMEADE: That debate is almost like our debate on training wheels. That was our debate seven weeks ago. And they can’t handle the give and take of the debate. They were outraged that someone was saying that there was a reason there was a certain group of people that attacked us on 9/11. It wasn’t just one person, it was one religion. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.
Watch it:
If Kilmeade took off his news “training wheels,” he’d know that some of the most notorious terrorists like the Tamil Tigers, who “invented” suicide bombing, the Irish Republican Army, and the Lord’s Resistance Army are not Muslim. In fact, the U.S’s recent domestic terrorists like the Unabomber, Timothy McVeigh, the Hutaree militia, John Patrick Bedell, Joe Stack, Jerry Kane Jr., and white supremacist James von Brunn were also not Muslim. California gunman Byron Williams, who tried to “start a revolution” in July, was actually inspired by Fox News pundit Glenn Beck, not Islam. Overall, according to the National Counterterrorism Center, non-Muslims account for 16,868 recorded incidents of terrorism, 967 less than Islamic extremists.
Fox host Geraldo Rivera tried to point this out. In reaction to Kilmeade, Rivera noted that when people talk about the “abortion bombers,” “they don’t say Christians blew up the abortion clinic. They say crazy people or extremists did it. You can’t…and that’s part of the noise that is causing Muslim Americans to feel besieged and beleaguered and being singled out.” But Kilmeade scoffed at the comparison.
As Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen notes, such a remark would “ideally” be a “Rick Sanchez moment” for Kilmeade, referring to the CNN hosts disparaging remark about Jewish people. But “that’s probably unlikely, since it’s Fox News and this kind of talk is painfully common.” (HT: Political Animal)
Rand Paul Wants To Abolish Department Of Education So Kids Don’t Have To Learn About ‘Two Mommies’
Rand Paul Wants To Abolish Department Of Education So Kids Don’t Have To Learn About ‘Two Mommies’
During yesterday’s Kentucky Senate debate, Rand Paul reiterated his support for abolishing the Department of Education, but then added that getting the federal government out of local schools would shield schoolchildren from learning about gay people:
PAUL: I would rather the local schools decide things. I don’t like the idea of somebody in Washington deciding that Susie has two mommies is an appropriate family situation and should be taught to my kindergardener at school. That’s what happens when we let things get to a federal level. I think I would rather have local school boards, teachers, parents, people in Paduka deciding about your schools and not have it in Washington.
Watch it:
The Wonk Room explains why Paul is wrong about the Department of Education’s role in establishing local curriculums and argues that Attorney General Jack Conway should have done more to repudiate the remarks.
Most Tennesseans Say Muslims Should Get Full Rights, Back Construction Of Murfreesboro Mosque Expansion
Most Tennesseans Say Muslims Should Get Full Rights, Back Construction Of Murfreesboro Mosque Expansion
As ThinkProgress has previously reported, for months, conservatives have led a hateful campaign against the expansion of a local Islamic center and mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. This campaign has been endorsed by high-ranking Republicans such as the state’s Lt. Governor, Ron Ramsey, who last month, wondered aloud whether Islam was a religion or a “cult.” The center was the target of an arson attack in August. Legal opponents of the Islamic center have even claimed that it has no constitutional rights because Islam is actually a seditious political movement, not a religion.
Now, a new poll conducted by Middle Tennessee State University finds that the majority of Tennesseans reject this far-right, hateful campaign and side with the right of Muslims to build the mosque expansion. Additionally, the poll finds that most Tennesseans thinks Muslims should get all the same rights as any other Americans, and only 14 percent disagree with that notion. The poll also finds that two-thirds of Tennesseans are against racially profiling Muslims:
Sixty-seven percent of Tennesseans polled said Muslims deserve the same rights as any Americans and only 14 percent disagreed. And 66 percent said they either supported or did not object to the construction of a new Islamic center in Murfreesboro, while only 28 percent objected. [...]
Twenty-eight percent of Tennesseans surveyed thought Muslims in America heighten the risk of terrorist attack. Two-thirds of those surveyed agreed that it is wrong to profile people as potential terrorists solely on the basis of their Muslim beliefs.
“We’ve had a wonderful experience in Nashville. We’ve encountered nothing but goodness from our neighbors in Nashville and Middle Tennessee for the past 30 years,” Rashed Fakhruddin, director of education at the Islamic Center of Nashville, told The Tennessean.
Defending Foreign-Funded Chamber, Rand Paul Says It’s ‘More Popular Than Any Politician Running For Office’
Defending Foreign-Funded Chamber, Rand Paul Says It’s ‘More Popular Than Any Politician Running For Office’
In a debate last night in Kentucky, the Senate candidates were forced to weigh in on the controversy over the Chamber’s foreign funding. Democratic candidate Jack Conway was asked to offer his stance on whether “secret donors [are] trying to influence the elections.”
Conway responded by correctly noting that the local chambers in various Kentucky towns are separate from the actions of the national chamber. Indeed, most of the local chambers operate independently. Noting that his father-in-law was a former head of a local chamber, Conway said, “Our local chambers of commerce do a great job.”
Conway continued that the “larger issue” is that the “U.S.” Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove’s American Crossroads group are “coming in here, and spending, spending, spending, spending, and trying to take your democracy away from you.” He concluded, “I don’t think the U.S. Chamber ought to be in here in support of a candidate [Rand Paul] that’s questioned civil rights and questioned the Americans with Disabilities Act.” (To be fair, local chambers may have supported the Disabilities Act, but the national Chamber did not.)
Republican Rand Paul responded with a full-throated defense of the Chamber:
I see the Chamber as a group that fosters economic development in every community. … In fact, we would encourage you to keep attacking the Chamber because the Chamber is probably more popular than any politician running for office. So please, your side, if you like this — keep on attacking the Chamber. It makes no sense whatsoever. And I think it’s a really, really poor political tactic and untrue.
Watch it:
Paul never explained what exactly is “untrue.” As ThinkProgress has meticulously documented, the Chamber is receiving at least $885,000 from over 80 foreign-based companies, co-mingling those funds into the same account that runs the political attack ads, and righteously refusing to disclose its donors.
Paul seems to be intentionally conflating the local chambers with the right-wing national chamber, hoping the popularity of the independent locally-run Chambers will inoculate him from his connection to the national Chamber. According to a Washington Post analysis, the national Chamber has spent at least $500,000 to defeat Conway, and Rove’s group (American Crossroads) has spent an additional $750,000.
The Chamber has a proud record of defending the outsourcing of American jobs overseas and receiving payments from companies that specialize in outsourcing. Is that the “economic development” that Paul is endorsing?
Moreover, since Paul likes to claim the mantle of transparency, does he think it’s appropriate that the Chamber does not disclose the donors who are funding the political attacks on Kentucky television? According a recent Bloomberg poll, 47 percent of respondents said they would be less likely to support candidates if their “campaign was aided by advertising paid for by anonymous business groups.” 56 percent of voters overall (including 53% of independents) are less likely to vote for a candidate if they know the ads supporting that candidate are paid for by anonymous corporations and wealthy donors.
CNN National Security Producer Joins Neocon Think Tank’s ‘Future Leaders’ Program
CNN National Security Producer Joins Neocon Think Tank’s ‘Future Leaders’ Program
The neoconservative think tank Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) just announced its 2010 Future Leaders Program, described as a program in which “young professionals have been chosen to participate in monthly dinners and discussions aimed at preparing them to become the next generation of leaders in foreign policy”:
This year’s class of Future Leaders will participate in dinners on U.S. diplomatic relationships, the war in Afghanistan, and critical national security threats, among other topics. Leading policy experts will drive the monthly discussions and provide career guidance and advice to the Future Leaders.
Notably, among FPI’s “Future Leaders” is CNN National Security Producer, Jennifer Rizzo.
The orientation of FPI is no secret. Headed by strident Iraq war supporters Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan, along with former U.S. occupation of Iraq spokesman Dan Senor, FPI is an effort to repair neoconservatism’s reputation after leading the U.S. into the Iraq catastrophe, and helping to create the current crisis in Afghanistan.
As part of the effort to re-establish neoconservatism in Washington as a “serious” ideology, building relationships with producers at influential news organizations is obviously a smart move. It will be important to keep an eye on just who FPI brings to its monthly dinners and discussions, and if and how it affects CNN’s coverage of FPI’s current goal of getting the U.S. to bomb Iran.
ThinkFast: October 15, 2010
ThinkFast: October 15, 2010
In a GOP strategy meeting last week, Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell warned an unsupportive GOP that “I’ve got Sean Hannity in my back pocket, and I can go on his show and raise money by attacking you guys.” Yesterday, O’Donnell followed through on Hannity’s radio show when she “acidly criticized” the National Republican Senatorial Committee “for not funneling any serious cash into her race.”
The U.S. has increased airstrikes on Taliban insurgents by 50 percent over the same period last year — “the latest piece in what appears to be a coordinated effort by American commanders to bleed the insurgency and pressure its leaders to negotiate an end to the war.” At the same time, top U.S. commander Gen. David Petraeus has increased Special Forces raids to clear territory of Taliban militants.
The Obama administration has “asked the federal judge who issued” a ruling striking down Don’t Ask Don’t Tell “for an emergency stay of her decision.” “The stakes here are so high, and the potential harm so great, that caution is in order,” said Clifford Stanley, under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
In her debate with Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) last night, Republican candidate Sharron Angle argued that health insurers shouldn’t be mandated to cover individuals. But, as the Wonk Room’s Igor Volsky notes, Angle co-sponsored mandatory coverage provisions during her time as a state legislator.
Rick Scott, the Republican gubernatorial nominee in Florida, was once sued by the state for insider trading, the Miami Herald and St. Petersburg Times revealed. In 1997, Scott’s hospital chain was the target of a massive FBI investigation, and Scott and several directors sold their stock 23 days before the FBI began raiding the company’s offices.
Florida’s U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled yesterday that the lawsuit challenging health care reform can go to trial over “whether it’s constitutional to force citizens to buy health insurance,” to tax people who don’t buy insurance, and to require states to expand Medicaid programs. In his 65-page ruling, Vinson agreed with the 20 states that say “Congress was intentionally unclear when it created penalties” in the law.
President Obama told a televised youth town hall that he favors raising more money for Social Security, instead of cutting benefits or extending the retirement age. Obama said the best approach would be raising the amount of income subject to Social Security taxes above the current cap, but also noted that “all options are on the table.”
White House Senior Adviser and Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett “apologized Thursday morning for referring to a gay teen who committed suicide as having made a ‘lifestyle choice.’” Jarrett said she “meant no disrespect to the LGBT community, and I apologize to any who have taken offense at my poor choice of words.”
And finally: Green Party gubernatorial candidate in Illinois Rich Whitney recently discovered that electronic voting machines in 23 wards — “about half in predominantly African-American areas” — misspelled his name “Rich Whitey.” Whitney, who is polling at around 2 percent, wondered “if this is machine politics at play or why this happened.”
ThinkProgress is hiring! Details here.
Yes On Prop 23 Campaigners ‘Very Thankful’ For Out-Of-State Oil Companies’ Funding
Yes On Prop 23 Campaigners ‘Very Thankful’ For Out-Of-State Oil Companies’ Funding
ThinkProgress filed this report from Sacramento, CA.
On Election Day, California voters will be asked to consider a ballot measure that would essentially scrap the state’s landmark clean energy legislation, passed with broad bipartisan support in 2006, which has helped the state create thousands of green jobs and become a global leader in green technology. The campaign behind the measure, known as Prop. 23, has been funded almost entirely by Texas-based oil companies Valero and Tesoro, Ohio-based Marathon energy, and Kansas-based Koch Industries, owned by right-wing megafunders Charles and David Koch.
Last month, the state’s Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger blasted these out-of-state companies for meddling in California’s election, saying their involvement is motivated purely by “self-serving greed.” “Does anyone really believe that these companies, out of the goodness of their black oil hearts, are spending millions and millions of dollars to protect our jobs?” Schwarzenegger said, noting that proponents of the proposition say it will help create jobs.
Today, ThinkProgress attended a tea party rally in support of Prop. 23 outside the California Environmental Protection Agency in downtown Sacramento. The event was organized by the conservative anti-tax Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, a key player in the Yes on 23 campaign, along with the Northern California Tea Party Patriots, and the California Dump Truck Owners Association. When asked by ThinkProgress about the out-of-state oil funding, representatives from each organizations didn’t deny it — in fact they were very grateful for the help:
– President of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association Jon Coupal, who spoke at the press conference: “Yes, do some people in the petroleum industry support us? You bet! … And we’re very thankful for their support”
–California Dump Truck Owners Association’s Betty Plowman, who also spoke at the event: “We’re broke” and need financial support, she said, so “thank God they came in.”
–NorCal Tea Party Patriots Campaign Coordinator Steve Cavolt: “Sure” he’s grateful, he said. “What difference does it make whether its coming from wherever if they do business in this state? Of course.” He also said that it’s “already been proven that that global warming is a hoax. It’s a scam.”
Watch a compilation of the protestors marching, Coupal, and Cavolt (Plowman asked not to be filmed):
Everyone ThinkProgress spoke with at the event noted that the Yes on 23 campaign is backed by a “broad coalition” of businesses, manufacturers, and taxpayer groups beyond the oil companies. While several dozen California organizations and individuals have indeed signed onto the campaign, their financial contributions are dwarfed by that of the out-of-state oil companies.
As the Los Angeles Times noted yesterday, “Valero is by far the largest contributor — giving more than three times as much as the next biggest funder, San Antonio-based Tesoro Inc. The third biggest contributor is Flint Hills Resources, a subsidiary of the Kansas-based Koch Industries.” As of last month, 97 percent of the Yes campaign’s funding came from oil, while 89 percent came from out of state. Valero, Tesoro and Koch alone accounted for 80 percent of total contributions.
Chamber’s Latest Lie: Our Foreign Fundraising Program Isn’t Part Of The Chamber
Chamber’s Latest Lie: Our Foreign Fundraising Program Isn’t Part Of The Chamber
Last week, ThinkProgress published an exclusive story about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s foreign fundraising operation. We noted the Chamber raises money from foreign-owned businesses for its 501(c)(6) entity, the same account that finances its unprecedented $75 million dollar partisan attack ad campaign. While the Chamber is notoriously secretive, the thrust of our story involved the disclosure of fundraising documents U.S. Chamber staffers had been distributing to solicit foreign (even state-owned) companies to donate directly to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6). We updated our investigation with a chart showing over 80 foreign companies giving at least $885,000 to the Chamber.
We documented three different ways the Chamber fundraises from foreign corporations: (1) An internal fundraising program called “Business Councils” used to solicit direct, largely foreign contributions to the Chamber, (2) Direct contributions from foreign multinationals like BP, Siemens, and Shell Oil, and (3) From the Chamber’s network of AmCham affiliates, which are foreign chambers of the Chamber composed of American and foreign companies. The Chamber quickly acknowledged that it receives direct, foreign money, but simply replied, “We are not obligated to discuss our internal procedures.” Instead of providing any documentation or proof to demonstrate foreign money is not being used for electioneering purposes, the Chamber launched an aggressive media strategy to first, attack ThinkProgress with petty name-calling and second, to confuse the media by highlighting the Chamber’s relatively minor AmCham fundraising, which the Chamber says (also without documentation) totals “approximately $100,000” from all 115 international AmCham chapters. The media largely ignored ThinkProgress’ revelation about the Chamber’s large, direct foreign fundraising to its 501(c)(6) used for attack ads, and helped the Chamber bury our scoop with misinformation.
Now, the Chamber is peddling a new spin. Yesterday, the Chamber’s Tom Collamore alleged that the Chamber’s foreign Business Councils are run as “independent organizations.” Repeating that myth today on hate-talker Glenn Beck’s program, Chamber lobbyist Bruce Josten claimed that the Chamber’s foreign Business Council fundraising programs are “completely unaffiliated with us.” However, the Chamber’s own website refutes Josten’s claim:
– The Chamber’s U.S.-Bahrain Business Council states that it is “under the administrative aegis of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and is intended to operate as a tax exempt business pursuant to Section 501(c)(6).” Similar language applies to the other Business Councils.
– The Business Councils are hosted on the U.S. Chamber’s website domain, and the Chamber Business Councils highlighted by ThinkProgress are all staffed by U.S. Chamber of Commerce employees.
– All of the Chamber Business Council fundraising applications highlighted by ThinkProgress direct applicants, including foreign corporations, to make their checks out to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, with related documents specifying its general 501(c)(6).
– Promotions to join the Chamber have included promises that foreign firms obtain “access to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and everything that it does” as well as pledges to help the foreign firms promote free trade policies in America. Chamber staffers from the Chamber’s Business Councils have claimed they help their foreign (and domestic) members wage a “two-front battle to knock down trade barriers abroad and keep our markets open at home.” Currently, the Chamber has attacked Democratic lawmakers for resisting a free trade deal with Korea.
The Chamber could have asked its foreign members and other foreign businesses to deposit their contributions in the Chamber’s Center for International Private Enterprise, an international Chamber-run 501(c)(3) nonprofit that does not run ads or any other type of political expenditure. Instead, ThinkProgress revealed that the Chamber had asked foreign businesses to donate to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6), a tax identity allowed to run unlimited political attack ads.
On top of the Chamber’s latest deception about its foreign fundraising program, the Chamber has little credibility. The Chamber illegally moved money from AIG’s tax exempt foundation to fund its attack ads in 2004. The Chamber also claims its current attack ad campaign is about “issues.” But the Chamber begged President Obama to pass the stimulus (as long as he stripped out tough “buy-American” provisions), and is now running attack ads against Democrats for voting for the stimulus. Many of the ads the Chamber is currently running are filled with misinformation and flat out lies. In fact, some responsible local television stations have even refused to run some of the Chamber’s partisan attack ads. On Tuesday, appearing on Fox News, Josten claimed that only 60 multinational companies are members of the Chamber, and it receives only $100,000 from its foreign affiliations. However, ThinkProgress blew this claim out of the water with proof that the Chamber is accepting at least $885,000 in direct donations from over 80 other foreign firms (in addition to the multinational members of the Chamber like BP, Siemens, and Shell Oil).
GOP House Candidate Wants To Repeal Pre-Existing Condition Health Care Coverage, All Other Reforms
GOP House Candidate Wants To Repeal Pre-Existing Condition Health Care Coverage, All Other Reforms
Last month, a whole host of new health care protections for Americans kicked in as a result of the health care reform bill the President signed earlier this year. These protections included mandating that insurance companies end exclusions based on pre-existing conditions for children, ending unfair recissions, and allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ health care plans until age 26.
Most Republicans, while openly campaigning to repeal this health care law, have said that they support these portions of the law that have already been enacted and will include them in their “replace” health care proposals. For example, the GOP’s Pledge To America promises that the party will “ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions.”
Yet during a debate with Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA), GOP congressional candidate Austin Scott staked out a position far to the right of the Pledge To America. At one point, the moderator asked Scott if there were “any provisions of the health care bill passed that” he supports, and that he’d “like to keep.” Scott gave a short reply: “No, ma’am, there are not. There just aren’t“:
MODERATOR: Are they any provisions of the health care bill passed that you support, that you’d like to keep?
SCOTT: No, ma’am, there are not. There just aren’t.
Watch it:
In opposing provisions that would end the practice of denying insurance to those with pre-existing conditions, Scott is essentially denying hundreds of thousands of Americans the ability to get any sort of decent health care coverage. A congressional investigation recently found that “the nation’s four largest for-profit health insurers denied coverage to more than 651,000 people over a three-year period, citing pre-existing conditions.” That means one out of seven American who applied for insurance was denied.
‘U.S.’ Chamber Of Commerce Funded By Top Offshoring Companies
‘U.S.’ Chamber Of Commerce Funded By Top Offshoring Companies
U.S. Chamber of Commerce campaign
While it tells the American public it cares about American jobs, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce actually works to send jobs overseas on behalf of its corporate members, which include some of Asia’s top offshoring companies. Its secretly-funded $75 million political ad campaign attacks the “anti-jobs record” of Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Jerry Brown (D-CA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Alexi Giannoulias (D-IL), Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV), and others.
As ThinkProgress previously noted, the Chamber has repeatedly sent out issue alerts attacking Democratic efforts to encourage businesses to hire locally rather than outsource to foreign counties. The Chamber has also bitterly fought Democrats for opposing unfettered free trade deals. The Chamber’s anti-American jobs agenda serves not only the profit-seeking of right-wing corporate executives in the United States, but also works to send jobs overseas to the following outsourcing companies, who are some of the dozens of foreign corporations that pay member dues to the Chamber of Commerce’s 501c(6) account, which is used to fund its political ads:
– InfoSys, Bangalore, India (at least $15,000 in annual member dues): “Infosys is the ‘Best Outsourcing Partner’ according to the Waters Rankings for the third consecutive year.”
– KPIT Cummins, Pune, India ($7,500): “Strategic global networking, together with industry-proven practices & processes, give KPIT Cummins a cutting edge in the realm of outsourcing.”
– Patni Americas, Mumbai, India ($15,000): “Patni, the world leader in IT outsourcing and business process outsourcing provides offshore software development, global sourcing, custom software development, and a vast array of product engineering and IT services to companies worldwide.”
– NIIT Technologies, Delhi, India ($15,000): “[L]eadership in the area of outsourcing.”
– QuEST Global, Singapore ($7,500): “QuEST is a leader in the engineering services outsourcing (ESO) space.”
– Rolta, Mumbai, India ($7,500): “Rolta’s global footprint and track record along with its capable off-shoring model gives it a unique positioning in this large market.”
– SKP Crossborder Consulting, Mumbai, India ($7,500): “SKP’s core outsourcing practice is managed out of a fully equipped, spacious premises based in Pune with access to facilities in Mumbai, Hyderabad, Delhi and Bangalore.”
– Tata Group, Mumbai, India ($15,000): “[W]orld-class solutions in outsourcing – business process outsourcing, application outsourcing, infrastructure outsourcing.”
– Wipro, Bangalore, India ($15,000): “India’s biggest destination for U.S. offshoring.”
In its “American Free Enterprise” campaign, the Chamber says that there is no “greater or more important” policy challenge “than creating the 20 million jobs needed in the next decade to replace the jobs lost in the current recession and to meet the needs of America’s growing workforce.” Perhaps the Chamber should actually start working toward that goal of creating jobs in America, instead of promoting the offshoring agenda of its foreign sponsors.
Rep. Steve King Blames President Obama For The Government Shutdown The GOP Wants To Orchestrate
Rep. Steve King Blames President Obama For The Government Shutdown The GOP Wants To Orchestrate
In the absence of any tangible or new policy solutions, Republicans are promising one concrete action should they win a majority in Congress: government shutdown. Picking up on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s two-tiered strategy, many Republicans are supporting Gingrich’s call to defund “every radical bill passed by the [Democratic] machine,” particularly the health care reform law.
Government shutdown would seriously jeopardize aid to vulnerable populations like veterans, Social Security and Medicare recipients, and 33 million Americans in need of health insurance. To defend such a disastrous strategy, Republicans are now shifting the blame on to President Obama.
In April, Gingrich insisted that is a shutdown occurred this year, it’d be because “President Obama wants to force a crisis.” Yesterday, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) picked up the blame Obama mantra. In an interview with King, national radio host Thom Hartmann pushed King to clarify his shutdown position, citing ThinkProgress’s report on the “blood oath” King demanded House Minority Leader John Boehner take to ensure the House would include defunding the health care law in every appropriations bill next year. While reiterating his plan to “shut off all funding” for the health care law, King insisted that President Obama’s actions, not his, that would cause the shutdown:
HARTMANN: Well apparently, is this true that you asked John Boehner for a blood oath that he would shut down government if you guys were not successful in killing off healthcare?
KING: Well no…And but the way I recall phrasing that, and I’m not going back and review the tape, is that if, I mean I stand on this side, I want to shut off all funding that would go to implement Obamacare. It’s entirely constitutional to do that, that’s how the Vietnam war was ended.
HARTMANN: Well Congress has the power of the purse, they can fund or shut off anything they damn well please.[...]
KING:…Did I call for Boehner to shut down the government, and no. In fact, Boehner can’t shut down, well I guess he could shut down the government if we agreed with him. But the first step would be we would put the rider on the appropriate bills that would prohibit the funding from being used to implement Obamacare but we would fund the government. And then under those scenarios, it’d be the president that would shut down the government, if he vetoed a bill because it didn’t include in it funding to implement Obamacare. That would be the president…
HARTMANN: Well if you guys don’t get the senate, that bill won’t get through the senate.
KING: If the house says its not going to be funded, it’s not going to be funded. That’s how it would be. But it wouldn’t be Boehner shutting down the government…
While Gingrich and King would like to shift blame to President Obama, the GOP’s own history marks that move as a “disastrous miscalculation.” In the winter of 1995, Gingrich devised a three-week shutdown of the entire federal government by refusing to pass a budget or a continuing resolution to fund government operations. From the “instant the shutdown began that November, the public sided overwhelmingly with the president” with 49% of voters blaming Republicans for the shutdown an only 26% blaming President Clinton. Gingrich’s disapproval rating, however, skyrocketed to 65%, forcing him to recognize that the GOP “strategy failed.”
And “there really is good reason to believe that a 2011 shutdown would backfire against Republicans just like the ’95 one did,” Salon’s Steve Korancki points out. “Sure, voters hate the idea of deficits and love the notion of a balanced budget. But they also like Medicare, which Gingrich’s GOP targeted for cuts in its plan, and are made uncomfortable by anything that seems radical — like a government shutdown.”
Condoleezza Rice Claims Bush Administration Made The World ‘A Safer Place’ From Terrorism While In Office
Condoleezza Rice Claims Bush Administration Made The World ‘A Safer Place’ From Terrorism While In Office
Former Bush national security adviser and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been on a tour of the media lately, eager to promote her recently released memoir.
On Tuesday, she appeared on Fox New’s The O’Reilly Factor. While most of Rice’s media tour has been focused on her childhood and upbringing, O’Reilly took the opportunity to ask her about her views on contemporary events. He asked Rice if the if the world is a “more dangerous place two years after” she left office. Rice replied that she thinks in the Bush administration made the world a safer place:
O’REILLY: Before we get to your book, Madam Secretary, is the world a more dangerous place two years after you left office?
RICE: The world was most dangerous in 2001, when we didn’t have a net to deal with terrorism. I think in that sense we made it a safer place from the time that we were in office. But Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon. That’s more dangerous. North Korea seems somewhat unstable with nuclear capability. That makes the world more dangerous. But, in fact, you’re always dealing with circumstances that are very difficult for a United States that has to lead.
Watch it:
While Rice may claim that Bush administration policies made the world a “safer place” from terrorism, the facts tell a different story. In 2007, terrorism experts and research fellows at Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank conducted a survey of terrorism incidents worldwide since the Bush administration-led U.S. war in Iraq. Their study found that terrorism incidents worldwide increased by seven times, or six hundred percent, since the Bush administration invaded Iraq.
More recently, researchers Robert Pape of the University of Chicago and James Feldman of Air Force Institute of Technology found that, “from 1980-2003, there were 350 suicide attacks in the world, only 15% of which were anti-American.” Yet after the Bush-led war in Iraq, “there have been 1,833 suicide attacks, 92% of which were anti-American.”
It should be noted that the Bush administration was well aware that its war against Iraq could lead to greater terrorism. A recently declassified State Department memo shows that the administration was privately worried that the war would “bring radicalization of British Muslims, the great majority whom opposed the September 11 attacks but are increasingly restive about what they see as an anti-Islamic campaign.” In July 2005, British Muslim extremists apparently radicalized by the war in Iraq detonated bombs throughout London, confirming the administration’s fears.
GOP Candidate Bob Gibbs Calls On FEC To Audit The Chamber Of Commerce
GOP Candidate Bob Gibbs Calls On FEC To Audit The Chamber Of Commerce
Last week, a ThinkProgress investigation revealed that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has been using foreign money to fund its partisan attack ads this election. The very same day, the Chamber endorsed Bob Gibbs (R) in his campaign against Rep. Zack Space (D) in Ohio’s 18th congressional district. Gibbs said it was “an honor” to have the group’s support. In the nine days since, the Chamber has already pumped nearly $30,000 into the race.
Last night, the topic of anonymous donors to outside groups came up in a debate between Gibbs and Space. ThinkProgress caught up with Gibbs afterward to get his thoughts. He noted that organizations are required by law to segregate their foreign and domestic money and said the Chamber “absolutely” has a firewall in place. We pressed him on whether he just trusts them to enforce their own secret system. Gibbs conceded that he “wouldn’t have a problem with the Federal Election Commission having the ability…to go in and audit them and make sure that they had the firewall.” However, he stopped short of calling for groups like the Chamber to disclose their donors to the public:
TP: One of the interesting things that was discussed in the debate was third-party spending, particularly with the Chamber of Commerce. They’ve been putting up tens of thousands of advertising dollars in the district on your behalf. Are you comfortable with the fact that they refuse to disclose their donors and that many of those are foreign companies and state-backed foreign companies?
GIBBS: Let’s be clear. It’s illegal for them to take donations from foreign nationals, just like it’s illegal in my campaign to do that. There’s absolutely a firewall. They segregate any funds…
TP: So you trust them? Because they’re system, they say they just have a system and just to trust them and their system because they won’t disclose it. You’re willing to trust them?
GIBBS: I wouldn’t have a problem with the Federal Election Commission having the ability – I don’t know if they do or not – to go in and audit them and make sure that they had the firewall.
TP: Do you think the average American citizen should be able to see that as well?
GIBBS: If they’re breaking the law, then we have to have a process in place to make sure that if they’re breaking the law we take care of that situation. [...]
TP: The one thing I would be curious though is, for instance, something like the DISCLOSE Act, which the Chamber fought vigorously against, which would have required them to disclose their donors for their political advertising. Is that something you would be in favor of, having them disclose their donors one way or another through legislation?
GIBBS: I haven’t delved into the issue or the arguments because I’ve been busy doing other things.
Watch it:
After O’Reilly’s Rants About How ‘Muslims Killed Us On 9/11!’ Goldberg And Behar Storm Off Set
After O’Reilly’s Rants About How ‘Muslims Killed Us On 9/11!’ Goldberg And Behar Storm Off Set
This morning, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly appeared on The View and chatted with the hosts about a variety of the day’s issues. At one point, the discussion turned to the topic of Park 51, the Islamic community center that is being planned to be built two blocks from ground zero in New York City.
O’Reilly proclaimed his strong opposition to building the community center, and the hosts began to press him on his position. Goldberg asked him why he and other Park 51 opponents are so against building the institution. O’Reilly responded by saying it was “inappropriate.” Goldberg then asked the Fox News host why he thought it was inappropriate, and he responded, “Muslims killed us on 9/11!” Goldberg responded by saying, “Oh my God!” and then used expletives censored by the station. O’Reilly continued to repeat his phrase, and co-host Joy Behar proclaimed, “I don’t want to sit here,” and got up and left. She was soon joined by Goldberg, who walked off the stage as the crowd cheered:
O’REILLY: Muslims killed us on 9/11!
GOLDBERG: Oh my God! That is so (expletive)
O’REILLY: Muslims didn’t kill us on 9/11? (crosstalk)
GOLDBERG: What religion was Mr. McVeigh?
O’REILLY: Muslims killed us on 9/11!
BEHAR: I don’t want to sit here.
Watch it:
O’Reilly has previously said that Park 51 shouldn’t be built because there are already “more than 100 mosques in New York City.” One has to wonder how far away they have to be from Ground Zero for him to not wrongly place responsibility on them for the acts of a handful of extremists.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll