The special security needs of the president's family

By Richard K. Barry

Sometimes the absurd arguments so common among the radical right are even too much for Fox News. In this case, NRA mouthpiece Wayne LaPierre is still trying to argue that President Obama's children live under the same threat as all other school children.

Fox News host Chris Wallace called him out on it over the weekend saying, "that's ridiculous and you know it":

Wallace asked his guest on "Fox News Sunday" if he regretted airing a controversial TV ad in which the NRA went after President Obama for providing armed security to his daughters but not supporting their proposal to put armed guards in all schools.

Prefacing his comments about the absurdity of LaPierre's claim, Wallace said, "you really think that the president's children are the same kind of target as every other school child in America?"

It's a crazy position, but these people do crazy very well.

The first clip is LaPierre being the ass that he is. The second is a scene from The West Wing in which President Bartlett explains to his daughter why her personal security is so important and why she would be such a target. I've been thinking about this a lot since the NRA started spinning their nonsense.

The always "objective" Bob Schieffer rushes to Romney's defence and blames Obama for going negative

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Appearing on CBS's Face the Nation yesterday, David Axelrod said that while Romney is qualified to be president, he isn't qualified to be called a "job creator":

Obama campaign senior strategist David Axelrod continued the campaign's assault on Mitt Romney's record on Sunday's "Face the Nation," defending attacks on Bain Capital and challenging whether the president's Republican challenger is qualified to be called a "job creator."

"No one's arguing whether Mitt Romney is qualified to be president," Axelrod said of the former governor and private equity firm founder. "What we're arguing is whether he's qualified to call himself a job creator. That's not what he did in his business. That's not the purpose of his business, and it's certainly not what he did in Massachusetts where they had one of the worst economic records in the country." 

I'm not sure Romney's qualified to be president, actually, but whatever. Let's leave that aside. What's abundantly clear is that Romney is not now and has never been a job creator (as the Republicans like to call the super-wealthy). An avid vulture capitalist, his record, particularly at Bain Capital, has been all about destroying jobs and ruining lives while making off with massive profits for himself.

Host Bob Schieffer, an establishment journalist with a long record of leaning Republican (particularly when his pal Dubya was in the White House), predictably rushed to Romney's defence, accusing the Obama campaign of going negative (see clip below).

Apparently, according to Schieffer, it's okay for Romney to smear Obama at every turn, even for his campaign to spew blatant lies, but it's not okay for Obama to suggest that Romney's time at Bain was something other than glorious capitalism at work.

As C&L's Nicole Belle writes:

Why is it that President Obama has to be positive and we see no pearl clutching over Romney outright lying about Obama's record, grading his presidency an "F" and doing cheap stunts like the Solyndra presser?

The truth, though Schieffer will not see it, is that the media has been far more negative in its coverage of Obama than it has been towards Romney.

Really, though, what else do you expect from Schieffer? (For a good critique, see Greenwald's post from last year.) Even Fox News's Chris Wallace was tougher yesterday, pressing (with numbers to back him up) Romney advisor Ed Gillespie about Romney's poor record on jobs while governor of Massachusetts.

Schieffer should be embarrassed -- again. But, then, he's just another "objective" journalist quick to regurgitate Republican spin and pin the partisan blame on Democrats.

Obama takes the oath... again

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, because Chief Justice Roberts flubbed it, screwing up the one job he had to do, because he and Obama just weren't on the same wavelength, and because idiots like Fox News's Chris Wallace made a big deal of the error and asked if Obama really was the president, even though he was, already, at noon on Inauguration Day, before he even swore on the Lincoln Bible, and because some "experts" thought it might be a good idea, and because of "an abundance of caution," as White House Counsel Greg Craig put it, and simply because the issue had to be put to rest, Obama took the presidential oath again, tonight, this time at the White House, presumably with Roberts not screwing up.

Okay. Can we move on? It's over.