Quantcast
Channel: BuzzFeed News
Viewing all 15742 articles
Browse latest View live

Former Christie Ally Claims The Governor Knew About Lane Closures

$
0
0

David Wildstein’s lawyer said the fired official can “prove the inaccuracy” of some of Christie’s post-scandal claims. A vague revelation buried in a legal letter.

David Wildstein, former Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Director of Interstate Capital Projects, as he pled the Fifth at a legislative hearing in Trenton, N.J., on Jan. 9.

Mike Segar / Reuters

A lawyer for David Wildstein — the former Port Authority official who allegedly closed two lanes of the George Washington Bridge in an act of political retribution — said in a letter Friday that "evidence exists" regarding New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's "knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly."

The letter, obtained by The New York Times, was sent by Wildstein's lawyer to counsel for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Wildstein's lawyer asks Port Authority to "reconsider [its] decision to deny Mr. Wildstein payment of his legal fees and indemnification."

Buried paragraphs below that request is an indication Wildstein believes Christie knew more than what he claimed in early January, when the Record exposed emails between Christie aide Bridget Anne Kelly and Wildstein plotting the closures — including Kelly's now-infamous phrase, "time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."

nytimes.com

Christie has denied any involvement with the lane closures, reportedly carried out under the guise of a traffic study to punish a mayor that wouldn't support the governor during his landslide reelection.

"I had no knowledge of this — of the planning, the execution or anything about it — and that I first found out about it after it was over," Christie said earlier this month.

In a statement released following the Times' story, a Christie administration spokesman reiterated that Christie "only first learned lanes were closed when it was reported by the press and ... had no indication that this was anything other than a traffic study."


View Entire List ›


Edith Windsor's Lawyer Seeks To Argue In Utah Marriage Appeal

$
0
0

Representing three same-sex couples, Roberta Kaplan filed a motion to intervene in the case challenging Utah’s marriage amendment that is on appeal at the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Mark Wilson / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Three same-sex couples — represented by the New York lawyer who represented Edith Windsor in her successful challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act — have asked the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals to allow them to intervene in the pending lawsuit challenging Utah's marriage laws.

In a Friday filing at the court, Roberta Kaplan argued on behalf of the couples that they should be allowed to intervene in the appeal — a move they acknowledge would be an "exceptional case" — in order to raise questions about other portions of Utah law that prevent recognition of same-sex couples.

Under the rules of the 10th Circuit, they note, it is possible that the court would not allow them to make arguments about those other provisions if they simply submitted amici curiae, or "friends of the court," briefs.

The state's opening brief in the appeal of Herbert v. Kitchen is due Feb. 3.

Update at 12:45 a.m. Feb. 1: Lawyers for the couples who brought the Kitchen case and a spokesperson for the organization where two of the attorneys on the case work did not respond Friday night to a request for comment on the request by Kaplan to intervene.

First, we meet the couples:

First, we meet the couples:

Then, the couples explain the issue they want to raise on appeal:

Then, the couples explain the issue they want to raise on appeal:


View Entire List ›

A Fry Cook Asked Obama About Low Wages—And His Hours Being Cut Due To Obamacare

$
0
0

Darnell Summers, a fast food fry cook, joined President Obama on Friday for his first ever live Google Hangout. Summers told the president about his troubles making ends meet earning $7.25 an hour and how he has been on strike four times to increase his wages. Summers also told Obama how his work hours have been “broken down to part-time to avoid paying health insurance.” He asked how Congress and the president could help him and people like him “survive.” In his response, Obama urged Congress to pass a minimum wage increase, but did not address the health care part of the question.

View Video ›

Obama Says Scandals Keep Resurfacing Because Fox News Promotes Them

Hillary Clinton Tweets Dig At Fox During Super Bowl

$
0
0

Former Secretary of State notes that it’s more fun to watch other people “being blitzed & sacked.”

Jason DeCrow/Associated Press

Her tweet followed President Obama's pre-game interview on Sunday with Fox News host Bill O'Reilly over the network's coverage of his administration.

Obama told O'Reilly that questions about the attack on the United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and other controversies "keep on surfacing in part because you and your TV station will promote them."

reactiongifs.com


View Entire List ›

Inside The Plan To Get More Young Americans To Enroll In Obamacare

$
0
0

“Women are the ones.” Only a quarter of the people who signed up for Obamacare in 2013 were between ages 18 and 34. Now outreach efforts have shifted as deadlines loom.

Via youtube.com

WASHINGTON — Obamacare supporters are hoping the day after Valentine's Day will be the day young people in America show health insurers some love. And they're banking on women to make it happen.

Feb. 15 is "National Youth Enrollment Day," a nationwide series of concerts, rallies, and online campaigns aimed at convincing more young people to sign up for insurance under the Affordable Care Act. It's the latest and largest piece of an effort that borrows heavily from President Obama's reelection campaign, a plan that's been slowed by the difficult rollout of the Affordable Care Act's online portal.

The date is also the last day Americans need to sign up for health insurance in order to have it by March 1.

With the (English-language, at least) website working, that effort is ramped up to near full steam. Health care enrollment by younger Americans has not met administration targets so far — only 24% of enrollees before Jan. 1 were between ages 18 and 34, according to administration demographic data. (The administration projected 39% of the 7 million enrollees by March would be young Americans.)

But the White House believes the early results show enough young people have signed up for insurance to avoid the so-called "death spiral," where sick people (who can no longer be denied insurance under the law) drag up premium costs by enrolling in insurance plans while there are not enough healthy people paying into the pool to support them.

Efforts on the ground have evolved. Early goals of door-to-door canvassing efforts similar to the unprecedented voter contact campaign Obama relied on to get elected have been scrapped, replaced with what White House allies call "precinct-level" strategy of which National Enrollment Day is the biggest single moment so far.

Beneath it all is a lingering search for the answer to health reform's toughest question: How do you get young, healthy men to buy coverage?

"I don't think there is a magic bullet," Justin Nisly, a top spokesperson for Enroll America, a grassroots enrollment effort closely allied with the White House and led by Obama 2012 veterans, said when asked about signing up young, healthy men. "If there is we'd like to find it."

For now, the answer to that question is find more women. The key to expanding the young male registration numbers, according to Nisly, is to make sure women are talking about health care.

Enroll America's research shows the source men most trust when making health care decisions are the women in their lives.

"Mom's number one, then comes significant other or wife," Nisly said. "Everything we see in the data shows us women are the ones."

This is convenient truth for health care supporters. Getting young women excited about Obamacare is relatively easy.

"It hasn't been a hard sell," Nisly said. Provisions like the requirements that women be charged the same as men and insurers provide birth control with no co-pay have proved appealing to women.

The original recruitment plan envisioned by Enroll America and other White House allies was highly targeted: Using an army of grassroots workers, the groups planned to knock on individual doors to find the uninsured and educate them about their new health care options.

After relying on that method during the opening months of health care enrollment, the effort has been largely scrapped, those familiar with recruitment said, especially when it comes to young people. It proved harder to find the volunteers supporters needed for canvassing efforts than it did to find volunteers willing to work at events, organizers said, and canvassing for young people proved slower than expected. In its place now is a recruitment drive focused on finding young people where they gather and handing out information about the health care law.

In a prime example, late last year, activists targeted people waiting in line for Air Jordans.

But dropping door-to-door recruitment efforts for event-based enrollment drives doesn't mean dropping the idea of using Obama campaign tactics to recruit young people to the health care rolls. On the contrary, activists say, events like National Youth Enrollment Day show that they're doubling down on a strategy modeled after the president's successful efforts to boost youth turnout.

The lack of a working website was an early problem, especially for youth enrollment, supporters of Obamacare concede. But now that the website is largely functional, the White House says it's the perfect way to woo young enrollees.

"If you were going to market something to young people today, you would want something where young people can go check it out for themselves. This is how young people shop: They google," Tara McGuinness, the White House's top spokesperson on the Affordable Care Act, said in an interview. "We have a site that allows you to check things out side by side. It's designed to provide a fair amount of choice and flexibility and personal decision-making."

While the grassroots work is done by groups outside the administration, the White House plays a key role in facilitating the efforts through a weekly conference call run through the Office Of Public Engagement. Marlon Marshall, a top official at the OPE, said the White House coordinated effort to woo young enrollees brings together a huge number of disparate groups, including African-American Greek organizations on college campuses, grassroots groups working on the ground in poor communities and social-media focused online groups. Marshall, a veteran of Obama's 2012 campaign, helped spearhead a December Youth Summit at the White House that brought together youth organizers and, he said, helped create the Youth Enrollment Day effort.

"You know what I would highlight? A lot of the faith organizing that is happening in communities," he said. "That's where we find a lot of people but also young people in these cities across the country, specifically young African Americans."

On the campaign trail, the president's campaign team often used rallying dates to centralize organizing efforts and create a sense of imminent deadline to boost volunteer participation and raise interest. Feb. 15 is meant to serve the same purpose, and organizers talk about it in campaign-speak.

"There will be events in cities all across America that will combine youth organizing approach but also have an enrollment hook," said Aaron Smith, a co-founder of the health care enrollment group Young Invincibles. He's excited to see pent-up advertising plans and other efforts planned for October finally launch now that HealthCare.gov is functioning.

"This is crunch time, we all have to really focus over these next three months," he said.

Smith said that his group has proven the best way to get young people to sign up for Obamacare is through a focus on affordability messaging. Young people who don't know much about the Affordable Care Act expect insurance coverage to be very expensive, and Smith says showing them the available subsidies for lower-income enrollees (a demographic that includes a lot of young people, he said) tends to spur interest the most. Some of the pro-Obamacare ads that have drawn the most attention so far — Oregon's now-suspended Portlandia-style ads and Colorado's Brosurance spots — haven't had what Smith would call the ideal messaging.

At the national level at least, there are signs that affordability will be the lead message when targeting the young in the immediate future. In January, the Obama administration announced former NBA stars Magic Johnson and Alonzo Mourning would star in a series of recruitment PSAs aimed at the sports TV audience. Johnson's ad talks up available subsides and urges viewers to find out what assistance is available to them.

Health insurers, who are relying on the administration and its allies to help boost enrollment totals, are happy to see a renewed effort but according to one close observer of the industry aren't holding their breath when it comes to waiting for events like National Youth Enrollment Day to work.

"Pessimistically optimistic," the observer said when asked to summarize industry views of White House-led youth outreach efforts so far. "I'd be loathe put any sort of adjective around it. Any and all efforts are helpful."

The source said insurers don't expect the administration is out of the woods yet when it comes to bad Obamacare headlines, and that could steer the youth enrollment effort off track.

"Every time they are building a little bit of momentum they get blunted by a bad story or a bad dozen stories," the observer said. "It's like everyday is a Friday news dump."

Over at the White House, meanwhile, there's a sense the momentum is with the law's supporters. Officials tout a December study from the Kaiser Family Foundation finding that the so-called "death spiral" is off the table as evidence that youth enrollment has gone fairly well so far, even if it hasn't hit the targets set out by the White House at the outset of health care enrollment. New youth enrollees are just helping to make a good thing better, said McGuinness.

"I wouldn't say it's all gravy," she said of adding new youth enrollees. "We have to work every day to reach people. But, what we've taken off the table is the threat of what some people are calling 'the death spiral.' … In some ways the big building blocks happened and no one noticed."

youtube.com

SOTU Poll Shows Why The White House Is Feeling Confident About Health Care Again

$
0
0

Exclusive new dial testing from the State of the Union night explains why the White House is increasingly confident about the Affordable Care Act and may help explain why some Republicans have dropped their “repeal at all costs” rhetoric.

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Last Tuesday night offered the best chance so far for Republicans and Democrats to test the health care messaging that will carry them through election season. Dial test poll results from the days after the State of the Union and its Republican response gives some insight into what's behind the White House confidence about the law — and may explain why some Republicans are trying to turn attention to their own alternative reform legislation rather than continue with their "repeal at all costs" message.

Polling conducted by health care policy newsletter The Morning Consult in the day after the State of the Union and shared exclusively with BuzzFeed show voters are happy to hear that both sides agree America cannot revert to the health care system that existed before Obamacare. The law itself remains unpopular and polarizing, but President Obama's focus on the reform package's ban on preexisting condition discrimination and medical bankruptcy prevention in his speech garnered a more positive reaction even among the Affordable Care Act's critics.

Independents reacted much more negatively to the health care messaging in the State of the Union address than Democrats did, a result the pollster's analysis says "could spell trouble for Democrats at the polls come November." Independents were more positive about both the official Republican response delivered by Washington Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and the "tea party response" delivered by Utah Sen. Mike Lee. Those positive ratings jumped when the Republicans pledged there would be no "going back" to the pre-Obamacare days.

In general, the poll found people like it when politicians say America will not go back to the way things were before Obamacare, and they respond positively to the central White House focus on the banning of preexisting condition discrimination and the Affordable Care Act's aim of ending medical bankruptcy.

This is not to say Obamacare's opponents are warming to the actual law itself. Those who said they were opposed to the Affordable Care Act before Obama's address were still very much opposed to it after the address. But, like supporters of the law, they had a positive reaction to Obama talking about the ban of preexisting conditions and the end of medical bankruptcy. From the pollster's analysis of the findings:

Viewers who disapprove of the ACA recorded primarily negative views, but showed some positive increases when the president mentioned people being protected from financial hardship due to health costs and the fact that people cannot be denied coverage for a preexisting condition.

This group recorded the highest positive rate when the president used the line "if misfortune strikes, you don't have to lose everything," but did not get above -30. Impressions decreased as the president mentioned expanding coverage to young adults and Medicaid enrollments, back down to -50. But they increased back up to -30 when the president mentioned that people with pre-existing conditions could not be denied health insurance.

Republicans, who have spent years calling for the repeal of Obamacare by any means necessary, changed their tone a bit on State of the Union night. Both the official Republican and Tea Party response included the promise that Republicans would not go back to the way things were before Obamacare. Respondents to the Morning Consult poll reacted positively, though Democrats were not won over.

Independents registered a 10-point positive increase when McMorris Rodgers said the country could not go back to the way things were before the Affordable Care Act, and those ratings continued to increase in response to McMorris Rodgers saying health care choices should be personal.

Republicans' ratings mirrored those of independents, but at rates that were about 10 points higher. Democrats increasingly disapproved of the messages, with a small increase when McMorris Rodgers said we could not return to the health system we had before the ACA.

Lee also got a bump from joining in on the "let's not go back" efforts:

Independents registered a 10-point approval of Sen. Mike Lee's comments that the country could not go back to the old health care system, which gave too much power to health insurance companies, but needed a different solution from the ACA, which gave too much power to the government.

Independent voters did not like it when Obama got directly chided Republicans over health care opposition. The president threw some red meat to his Democratic friends during the State of the Union by chiding House Republicans for their dozens and dozens of Obamacare repeal votes.

"The first 40 were plenty," Obama said. "We got it."

Independent voters were not happy with the tone.

"Independent voters did not like when the president poked fun at Republicans' 40-plus votes to repeal the health reform law, recording negative ratings," the Morning Consult analysis found. "However, the snarky line did elicit positive responses from younger viewers."

Read the polling memo

ACLU Filing Lawsuit In Wisconsin Seeking Marriage Equality

$
0
0

“Wisconsin’s discriminatory exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage does not serve any compelling, important, or even legitimate government interest,” the lawsuit argues.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

Pool New / Reuters / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The American Civil Liberties Union is going to federal court Monday in Wisconsin, suing Gov. Scott Walker and other officials to secure marriage rights for same-sex couples there.

Challenging the state's marriage amendment, similar to those in other states, the lawsuit also challenges another provision of Wisconsin law — a "marriage evasion law" — which makes it a crime "to leave the state to contract a marriage that is prohibited or void" in Wisconsin, per the lawsuit.

The lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Virginia Wolf and Carol Schumacher, married in Minnesota. The lawsuit details the problems they face from these laws now, following the federal government's actions since June 2013 to begin providing benefits to married same-sex couples. According to the lawsuit, a copy of which was provided to BuzzFeed:

By solemnizing their love and commitment in a state that acknowledges the dignity of their relationship, Carol Schumacher and Virginia Wolf risk criminal prosecution in their home state. The unmarried Plaintiffs are forced to choose between the risk of prosecution and foregoing access to any federal spousal protections. Once again, Wisconsin has no justification for this treatment other than Plaintiffs' sexual orientation and sex.

The lawsuit alleges that the state's marriage ban violates due process protections because it limits the right to marry and equal protection based on sexual orientation and gender discrimination.

Mayer Brown is co-counsel with the ACLU and ACLU of Wisconsin in the case, Virginia Wolf et al. v. Scott Walker et al. The case is the first federal case that would be heard by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes federal courts in Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. Mayer Brown partner Hans Germann and two associates at the firm, including a former clerk to 7th Circuit Judge Frank Easterbook, are working on the case.


President Obama Made A Horrible Super Bowl Prediction

$
0
0

Impeach.

Obama's prediction: "I can't make a prediction. I don't know. These guys are too evenly matched. I think it is going to be 24-21."

View Video ›

Final Score:

Final Score:

Pete Souza/White House

New York Times Has Been Editing Reporters' Wikipedia Pages For Years

$
0
0

The edits would seem to be a violation of Wikipedia’s “conflict of interest” policy.

People at the New York Times have been making edits to Times' reporters' Wikipedia pages for years, a search of the paper's public IP address in Wikipedia finds. The edits would seem to be a violation of Wikipedia's "conflict of interest" policy.

Many of the edits seem fairly minor, such as blanking a section on a reporter's personal life, changing a reporter's job title, or updating where Gail Collins has taught.

It is unclear if the edits to the pages were done by a public relations professional at the Times, the reporters themselves, or others.

In November 2013, the Times IP address made several edits to reflect the sale of the Boston Globe.

In June of 2013, several edits were made to reporter Nicholas Confessore's page, changing where he went to high school and removing that he covered Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election. A 2007 edit removed that Confessore came in second place in Gawker's "Love Him For His Body" contest.

An edit in January 2013 added Abbe Ruttenberg Serphos "Executive Director, Corporate Communications" to the "notable alumni" section of the University at Albany.

In one instance, a reporter attempted to ask for edits through the "Talk" page on Wikipedia. Joseph Berger did so in August of last year saying his page was inaccurate.

"Folks: There are a number of inaccuracies in the Wikipedia article about me. I have never written for the New York Daily News. I have been a staff reporter and editor for The New York Times since 1984 and now specialize in New York City metro affairs. I was a religion correspondent, not editor, served as deputy education editor, not the editor, and worked only temporarily as an assistant Metro editor. I repored several time from Jerusalem but was never its fulltime correspondent. Please correct these errors. Joseph Berge"

An edit in September 2010 added a business editor, Timothy L. O'Brien (who is now at the Bloomberg), to the notable alumni section of Columbia University.

An edit in November 2011 added Times editor Jennifer Jenkins to notable alumni section of Palm Bay High School.

An edit in March 2008 added then-Times reporter Trymaine Lee to the list of notable alumni of Rowan University.

A search of the Times edits on its "user contribution" page show among the edits, 17 edits to former columnist Clyde Haberman's page, seven edits to photojournalist Tyler Hick's page, six edits to columnist Jim Dwyer's, three edits to reporter Jodi Kantor's page, 13 edits to the "list of The New York Times employees" page, four edits to columnist Mark Bittman's page, two edits updating the number of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to Times reporters, and three edits to L.A. Bureau Chief Adam Nagourney's page, among an array of other edits to Times reporters and edits to other subjects.

Edits from the Times IP also added information to the pages of journalists from other organizations.

An edit from the New York Times IP address in March 2008 added a section saying photos of now-MSNBC host Thomas Roberts "allegedly posted of himself on the gay cruising site Manhunt.net made the rounds on the Internet."

The IP address 170.149.100.10 is listed as "The New York Times Company."

A New York Times spokeswoman asked if BuzzFeed had questions about specific edits and then did not return a request for comment.

Obama's Super Bowl Interview With Bill O'Reilly In 6 Seconds

New PAC Seeks To Make National Security A Focus Of 2014 Congress Races

$
0
0

A new ally for Obama on Iran.

Joshua Roberts / Reuters

WASHINGTON — A new political action committee says it plans to spend a quarter million dollars on 2014 congressional candidates who support "progressive" national security policies.

Former naval intelligence analyst Jim Arkedis launched 4D PAC (the D's stand for democracy, diplomacy, development, and defense) this week. The idea grew out of VetPAC, which supported Democratic veterans running for Congress. The new organization will have a broader scope.

"We wanted to rebrand this so we could focus on a broader set of national security issues," Arkedis told BuzzFeed, including "supporting increased levels of aid and making sure there's money to support democratic institutions" abroad.

But "not necessarily forcing the adoption of democratic institutions at the working end of an Abrams tank."

The PAC is still in the beginning stages, and Arkedis and his co-founders, Brad Elkins and Kevin McTigue, are in the throes of rounding up a donor base, he said. They're trying to raise and spend $250,000 this cycle, though Arkedis declined to name which candidates the PAC plans to endorse. Molly Allen Associates, a fundraising firm that raises money for several Democratic members of Congress, is handling the fundraising for 4D PAC.

After a year of intense scuffles between Congress and the White House on major foreign policy issues like intervening in Syria or how to handle the Iran nuclear deal, Arkedis is looking to support candidates with a progressive foreign policy that at times dovetails with the administration, stressing multilateralist diplomacy and assistance for developing countries.

"I would say 'progressive internationalism,'" Arkedis said when asked what kind of ideology the PAC espouses, and told BuzzFeed to steer clear of the "liberal interventionist" label.

"We would support the Obama administration's approach to Iran currently," Arkedis said when asked if the PAC would support candidates who favored implementing new Iran sanctions now.

Arkedis said he saw the PAC as a 10- to- 15-year project and that it's the only political action committee involved in 2014 focusing exclusively on national security and foreign policy issues.

"There are other organizations like the National Security Network, which does a lot of messaging," Arkedis said, "but there's nobody who really does a full-throated endorsement of candidates that are seeking to speak to the full basket of national security issues."

The PAC is planning a kickoff breakfast later in February and a happy hour with Rep. Derek Kilmer, a Washington Democrat.

8 Reality Shows That D.C. Really Needs

Glenn Beck: Multilingual Coke Ad Meant To "Divide Us Politically"

$
0
0

The talk show host took offense at Coke’s new Super Bowl ad.

Glenn Beck was none too pleased with Coca-Cola's new multilingual ad, saying on his radio show the ad's purpose was to "divide us politically."

View Video ›

“So somebody tweeted last night and said, ‘Glenn, what did you think of the Coke ad?’ And I said, ‘Why did you need that to divide us politically?’ Because that’s all this ad is,” Beck said. “It’s in your face, and if you don’t like it, if you’re offended by it, you’re a racist. If you do like it, you’re for immigration. You’re for progress. That’s all this is: to divide people. Remember when Coke used to do the thing on the top and they would all hold hands? Now it’s 'Have a Coke and we’ll divide you.'”

Here's Coca-Cola's multilingual rendition of "America the Beautiful":

youtube.com

LINK: Glenn Beck: “I Think I Played A Role, Unfortunately, In Helping Tear The Country Apart”

The Daily Download Lives: World's Greatest Website's Videos Still Air On Public Television

$
0
0

A station in Jonesboro, Ark., has been using them as “filler.”

The Daily Download, the much-scrutinized project of media personalities Lauren Ashburn and Howard Kurtz that was shutdown in November 2013, still exists — at least on public TV in Arkansas.

A series of video reviews that Kurtz and Ashburn made for Maryland Public Television (MPT) have been airing on Jonesboro, Ark., public television throughout the month of January.

A representative of KTEJ, a public television station which is part of PBS-member Arkansas Educational Television Network, said they received "a new batch" of Daily Download videos from MPT in January and they use them as "filler" between programs.

The videos are described by MPT as "a series of video reviews that help consumers determine which websites and online tools for covering news and public affairs are effective and credible." They run 60 seconds.

Anusha Alikhan, a representative of the Knight Foundation, forwarded BuzzFeed to MPT. The Knight Foundation provided $230,000 to help support the launch of the Daily Download website.

MPT has not returned BuzzFeed's request for comment concerning whether the videos are still being produced or why KTEJ received a new "batch" of videos in January.

Kurtz was fired from his position as the Daily Beast Washington bureau chief in May after producing a video regarding out NBA player Jason Collins and amid questions about time Kurtz was spending on the Daily Download.

Kurtz joined the Fox News Channel in June of 2013, after his contract was not renewed at CNN. Ashburn joined him at Fox in August.

Gawker reported in early January that Kurtz had a much bigger financial ties with the Daily Download website than he had previously said and misled in a CNN interview when he said he had a "limited" and "freelance" role at the site.

Here's are some Vines of the segments. Remember you need to turn the sound on in the top left corner to hear them.

vine.co

vine.co

vine.co


View Entire List ›


Putting My Money Where My Mouth Is

$
0
0

Last year I got a ton of crap for having an opinion. Now it’s everyone else’s turn.

The Backstory

The Backstory

In April of last year I wrote what I knew would be a somewhat controversial article which ended up being more like a bomb drop on a very specific corner of the conservative new media.

After attending the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and witnessing what I believed was not a particularly well thought out film trailer, I took to Buzzfeed and offered my opinion on why I hoped that the makers took a different route before turning it into a feature film. The creators, Tea Party Patriots, pushed back on my opinion by noting that, in spite of what I'd been told, there was no intention to move from the short film into a longer film. The director of the piece took particular umbrage with what I'd written, going so far as to call in to a radio podcast I was being interviewed on to confront me over my review.

To make matters even more interesting, a friend of mine wrote multiple articles — on Breitbart.com, my old stomping grounds — attacking me for critiquing conservative efforts on BuzzFeed, which he deemed an unfriendly venue.

This is not to say I didn't have support for what I'd written. I had loads of it, even from some at Breitbart. But amazingly, this has all come up numerous times in the year since I wrote it. My critique of conservatives has been mentioned on panels at conferences and used as an example of going outside the conservative echo chamber to talk about conservatives.

Let me preemptively concur with any reader who is preparing to speed to the bottom of this article to leave a snarky comment about how this is niche segment of conservative online media talking to themselves. I readily admit that the impact and controversy that came as a result of my article is not exactly at the forefront of the American debate on culture (which was primary point in the article) nor will it have a long term effect on conservative blogosphere.

But I can't help but acknowledge one criticism that came from a friend: He said he knew most of the people upset with me were upset because I'd chosen to critique those who had done something I hadn't. I put myself out there as a filmmaker and criticized the work of others, using my position as owner of a production company to underscore my critique.

However, and I admitted this in the article, I had not actually made a film myself. I offered condemnation of work without fully appreciating what goes into making that which I was condemning.

It's a fair point and one that I am hoping to remedy today.

The Film

The Film

Premiered in Washington, DC on Thursday night and released to YouTube for a limited time on Friday, I have released a documentary funded & produced by my production company. The film is called Bankrupt and it is about the fall of Detroit.

As someone who experienced extreme financial crisis coming into the recession, the story of the auto bailouts which were ostensibly offered to "save Detroit," I always had a particular distaste for what I'd seen take place. From my perspective, while I struggled with companies I owned and watched them descend into bankruptcy from 2008-2012, I simultaneously had to endure the auto companies waltzing into Washington, asking for billions of dollars to save themselves and the city that they helped build, and listen to George W. Bush tell the world that they were too big to fail.

As a small business owner, watching this unfold was upsetting and personal. It was the moment that I understood how damaging big business in bed with big government can be.

This, along with TARP, was the moment I became an activist and a blogger. That President Obama continued the practice begun under President Bush was as unsurprising as it was disappointing.

Then, in 2013, I watched as politicians called the bailouts a success while the city they were dispatched to "save" fell further into disrepair and finally, bankruptcy. At that moment, I knew that I had to do more than simply vent my feelings in a blog post or a short video.

And so myself and my crew, Director of Photography Michael Deppisch, Production Manager Sarah H. Smith and Co-Producer Thomas LaDuke, quietly set about making a film to document the state of the city. We talked to experts about how they got here and what's next, to a City Councilman who told us his hopes for the Motor City, and also to people on the street to find out how they felt about it all and what they expect next.

I'm proud of what we created but I thought it was important, in light of the controversy last year, to put this out there for the world, for free, on YouTube, so that anyone and everyone can tell me what they think.

I can take criticism, of course I'll love compliments. But either way, I hope you'll watch.


View Entire List ›

This Tumblr Inserts Conservative Politicians Into Modern Art And It Is Glorious

Operatives Bristle As DNC Chair Downplays Chances Of Winning Back The House

$
0
0

Debbie Wasserman Schultz said last week, “I’m not going to confidently predict that Democrats will take the House back.” That’s not the kind of thing Democratic operatives want to hear from their party chair. “This was not a particularly helpful thing to say or a particularly good way to say it,” says one.

Paul Morigi / Getty Images for FORTUNE

WASHINGTON — Democratic operatives working to bolster their party's numbers in the House say Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz set their efforts back when she said "I'm not going to confidently predict that Democrats will take the House back" in an interview with Politico last week.

"My candidates are calling and talking about the damage it did to the president's push for the House and the push Democratic members and candidates are making for 2014," said Democratic strategist working on House races.

Wasserman Schultz made the comments to Politico during an appearance with House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy last week. The DNC chair, who is also a representative from Florida, said her party will "pick up seats," but wouldn't back the idea that Democrats could regain the majority they lost in 2010.

Most nonpartisan political prognosticators are predicting the Republicans will hang onto to control of the House. The Cook Political Report's Charlie Cook laid out the view at an American University event last month. "There's just not a lot of elasticity left in the House anymore," he said.

But as a piece of political rhetoric, consultants trying to elect more House Democrats said Wasserman Schultz' remarks are less than helpful to their cause. The conservative media seized on the remarks and consultants said they don't help much when it comes to raising money.

"It was an indelicate, inarticulate way to say that," said another operative working to elect House Democrats. "It forces you to underscore to donors the potential that exists and the opportunity that exists. If you look at retirements, there are many more Democratic pickup opportunities than Republican pickup opportunities. It's not a one-cycle deal."

A DNC official said Wasserman Schultz is committed to winning House races.

"The chair predicted that we would pick up seats in the House – and that's exactly we're going to do in November," said Michael Czin, DNC spokesperson. "The DNC constantly works with the DCCC, candidates and state parties to make sure they have the resources they need to pick up seats and take back the House."

Party chairs walk a difficult line when it comes to things like predicting electoral outcomes. While a cynic may expect them to simply say their party is definitely going to win every election they're participating in, right up until election day, observers say that can pose a credibility problem. On the other hand, saying an election is all but lost is potentially damaging to fundraising at a time when top donors are already turning their attention away from House races.

It's not the first time Wasserman Schultz has perhaps told it like it is only to get in trouble with fellow Democrats. Last year, after she was open about her own political ambitions and her belief that leading the DNC can help her further her personal goals, top Democrats accused her of making the DNC job "all about her."

The House campaign operatives aren't going as far in their criticisms this time. But they wish Wasserman Schultz had said something different last week.

"I think she's a good cheerleader for the party, and good for Democrats," one of the House campaign operatives said. "But this was not a particularly healthy thing to say or a particularly good way to say it."

Obama Aides Doubt Clinton Strategy

$
0
0

“She doesn’t need this,” says Benenson.

Mike Theiler / Reuters

Top advisers and former aides to Barack Obama say Hillary Clinton is repeating the mistakes she made in 2008, building a machine in lieu of a message and lumbering toward the Democratic nomination with the same deep vulnerabilities that cost her the nomination eight years earlier.

The former secretary of state has offered her tacit blessing to a series of Democratic organizations, including a draft group, Ready for Hillary, which was recently taken over by a former Clinton aide, and Priorities USA Action, the Obama super PAC repositioning itself to raise huge sums for Clinton. The moves have been effective in telegraphing to other would-be candidates that they may have a hard time raising money and building an organization, and in establishing the sense of inevitability that was central to her 2008 campaign — a perception that also backfired badly.

"I just don't see any strategic value in stories positioning her as inevitable or the preemptive nominee, and I don't think people who are out there talking about this help her, and I think she should make that clear," said Joel Benenson, Obama's chief campaign pollster and now the top White House pollster. "She doesn't need this. If she decides to run for president, everybody knows she's going to be able to raise money, everybody knows she's going to be extremely formidable, that she's going to have a significant network of supporters around the country — so what's the value of all this in 2014?"

In 2008, that sense of inevitability had tactical consequences: her positions drew more scrutiny than her rivals', and observers developed a rooting interest in the underdog, while donors and operatives who hadn't gotten in on the Clinton ground floor 20 years earlier went elsewhere. And Obama aides, who outmaneuvered the Clinton juggernaut seven years ago, see similar weaknesses developing already.

"The further out front the effort to elect Sec. Clinton is three years before election day, the greater the incentive is for the press, prospective opponents, and adversarial groups to scrutinize and attack her every move," said Ben LaBolt, the national press secretary for the 2012 Obama campaign. "Even if it is a well-known candidate — sometimes more so — activists, donors, and voters like to see candidates fighting for every vote. If they start to feel like their power and influence is diminished it could have unforeseen consequences — we learned that lesson the hard way during the New Hampshire primary in 2008.

The willingness of Benenson and others to speak openly about their concerns reflects a growing consensus among Democrats that Clinton may be taking a wrong turn, something that has been much the conversation among the people — notably, advisers to Obama and to former Sen. John Edwards — who jointly beat her seven years ago in Iowa, beginning the end of her campaign. Officials were also willing to speak on the record about what they see as those mistakes, in part to send a message to the former secretary of state. "People are really getting worried about it," said another former top Obama aide, who said she would like to see a woman elected but worried that Clinton "doesn't have a compelling rationale for her candidacy."

Some Clinton aides agree, quietly telling colleagues that they fear that jockeying for position, rather than Clinton's own interest, has spurred the early build-out. And others with front-row seats in 2008 see a similar pattern.

"I see real similarities emerging in terms of carrying the mantle of the status quo, getting out front too soon — and playing it safe. The GOP is so messed up it might work — but running this way could be the way she loses again," said Joe Trippi, a top adviser to Edwards.

That air of inevitability proved a particular problem in the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire, where activists expect to be courted; and when Ready for Hillary arrived in Des Moines last month, it wasn't clear who was supposed to be making the first move.

"All this stuff about her being destined to be [the nominee], and it coming from top-down, and being ordained — we've really got to work hard to overcome that. It's got to be grassroots up," said Phyllis Peters, a 55-year-old resident of Ames, Iowa, who volunteered for her 2008 campaign.

"Everybody has to earn it," said Peters. "You can't assume it's been given to you on a silver platter."

Clinton's infrastructure has a range of elements, and Democrats said she is making some prudent moves. Efforts to defend her reputation as Secretary of State, and combat Republican attempts to define her, for instance, may not be able to wait. But the erection of a large-scale fundraising machine at Priorities USA and a grassroots Ready for Hillary — two super PACs operating outside Clinton's control — both strike a range of former Obama officials as unwise.

"Being seen as a front-runner this far before there's another candidate will only lead to an organized effort to find an alternative," said a fourth former senior Obama campaign aide. "If another step is taken — and maybe her allies try to change the calendar or do something to the rules to make it easier — there's going to be a backlash."

Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines noted that the groups are independent, and that Clinton's own staff is small.

"They are acting on their own," he said in an email, putting the size of Clinton's own foundation staff at just seven.

Clinton "is not a candidate. Unless and until she is, we're not going to act like one," Reines said, adding, "I respect Ben [LaBolt], but I think many on the president's team would say doing so — anyone doing so — this far out wouldn't make sense."

And a spokesman for Ready for Hillary, Seth Bringman, argued that Ready for Hillary is replicating Obama's effort, not Clinton's.

"President Obama's victories in 2008 and 2012 demonstrated that successful presidential efforts aren't built overnight; they're built over time and from the ground up," he said, noting that the group has hired as consultants former Obama aides. "I'm sure there's a couple people out there who disagree, but nearly 2 million supporters believe this mission is critical."

(A spokesman for Priorities USA did not comment for the record.)

Indeed, Obama's former aides hasten to add that Clinton is in a far stronger position than she was in 2007. She has a record as a loyal and respected member of President Obama's Cabinet, one that erases long-ago worries about her national security experience. The war in Iraq is no longer a top issue for Democrats. And no talented young African-American progressive is headed for Iowa.

But the 2008 election was fought as much on character as on policy. Obama and Edwards fought to define Clinton as manufactured, untrustworthy, and a creature of forgotten Baby Boom quarrels. In the late primaries and in the subsequent years, she built an alternate image: of a gritty and authentic fighter, a pioneering woman, and a resilient national force.

It's that second image that now appears to be at risk.

"I would tell her to be much more of a risk taker and not to be so concerned about will this incremental position hurt me or this incremental position help me and just lay out there what you believe," said former Edwards pollster Harrison Hickman. "She's someone people will respect and people aren't going to get overwrought if they disagree with her on one or two issues."

"They can actually undercut an essential characteristic of presidential candidates — they want to see someone fighting for it, they want to see someone earning it the hard way," said Benenson, the Obama pollster. "They want to see her demonstrate some of that grit that she brings to the table."

President Obama Says Fox News Is "Absolutely" Unfair To Him

$
0
0

Fox News aired a second, extended interview Monday between Bill O’Reilly and President Obama taped after the contentious Super Bowl sit-down .

youtu.be

"Fox News, I can't speak for Fox News, but I'm the table setter here at 8 o'clock. Do you think I'm being unfair to you, do you think I've been giving you," O'Reilly asked.

"Absolutely, of course you are, Bill. But I like you anyway," Obama said.

"Give me how I'm unfair," O'Reilly responded.

"We just went through an interview in which you asked about health care not working, IRS, were we wholly corrupt, Benghazi," Obama said. "So, the list of issues you talk about ... they're defined by you guys in a certain way."

Obama was later asked by O'Reilly if he believes he's the most liberal president in American history.

"You know, the truth of the matter is that when you look at some of my policies in a lot of ways, Richard Nixon was more liberal than I was," Obama said. "He started the EPA. You know, a whole lot of the regulatory state that has helped make our air and water clean."

Viewing all 15742 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images