Sure he would. This whole video is him speculating that Carolyn Maloney will be the Democratic Party's ranking member in the finance committee, because that's who the banksters want.

And then he spends 5 minutes crowing about how right he is because an article got published in a newspaper that pretty clearly indicated banksters like her. So what? Only crazy Republicans think the newspapers work for the Democratic party.

Plus, every quote he took from the article was sourced to someone on Wall Street's side. Where's a source from, say, someone in the Democratic party who's part of the decision-making process? Nowhere to be found in Cenk's piece. But, in the article he's sourcing all this from, there's this:

“For Nancy Pelosi, Maxine is a three-fer,” said one congressional staffer, noting that it will be Ms. Pelosi who ultimately makes the determination if Democrats retake control. “She is a fellow Californian, she is an African-American woman, and it is her turn.”

And this:

“A lot of folks in the CBC [Congressional Black Caucus] would not look too kindly on an outside challenge,” said one Capitol Hill lobbyist. “They want to go back to the seniority system.”

And this:

For her part, Ms. Waters seems confident her long service will carry her through. “Let me let you in on a secret: I am the senior-most person serving on the Financial Services Committee,” she told the 2012 California State Democratic Convention last month. “Barney Frank is about to retire, and guess who’s shaking in their boots? The too-big-to-fail banks and financial institutions and all of Wall Street because Maxine Waters is going to be the next chair of the Financial Services Committee.”

Oh, so Nancy Pelosi, the CBC, and Maxine herself all think she's a lock? Well, that would kinda undercut Cenk's anti-Democratic spin, so he doesn't mention any of that.

Cenk's whole show seemed to just be a vehicle for bashing Democrats, often for things they aren't actually guilty of doing. Like...this whole thing about Carolyn Maloney, which is 100% speculation!

At this point he honestly seems to me like some sort of Karl Rove creation designed to depress Democratic turnout and liberal activism.

>> ^messenger:

Cenk would only say that Waters had sold out to the banks if it were demonstrably true. He's big on backing up his statements with facts. He would never just speculate that she "must have" sold out.

Cenk would only say that Waters had sold out to the banks if it were demonstrably true. He's big on backing up his statements with facts. He would never just speculate that she "must have" sold out. On the contrary, if she gets the position, he'll be happy, admit his mistake (now that he's doubled down, he's going to have to bring it up), and probably comment on how good it is that the powers that be didn't get their way.

As for his spin, yeah, that's his show. He's not an organizer. He just provides stories and commentary. And if you watch his show and understand what he's talking about, he's providing all the information you need to form your own opinion on what to do. The last thing he would ever do is tell someone the appropriate reaction to a story.

Also, Cenk might not do that because a few letters aren't going to counterbalance the millions in campaign contributions, and that problem is one of his favourite points to make, so it would be pretty weak for him to turn around and tell people to write in.>> ^NetRunner:

These days, I have no idea. I could easily see Cenk responding to Maxine Waters getting the spot by saying she only got it because she sold out to the banks herself.
The problem I have with Cenk is that he always presents this sort of thing with highly cynical spin. Like, why make the theme of the rant "Democrats are gonna sell us out", instead of "Maxine Waters would be awesome, and she's going to face a lot of opposition, so let's get her back, write to Nancy Pelosi and tell her you want Maxine representing the Democrats in the Finance Committee..."
You're communicating the same facts, but instead of making it into some slam against Democrats in general, you make it into a rallying cry to progressives to support one of their champions.

These days, I have no idea. I could easily see Cenk responding to Maxine Waters getting the spot by saying she only got it because she sold out to the banks herself.

The problem I have with Cenk is that he always presents this sort of thing with highly cynical spin. Like, why make the theme of the rant "Democrats are gonna sell us out", instead of "Maxine Waters would be awesome, and she's going to face a lot of opposition, so let's get her back, write to Nancy Pelosi and tell her you want Maxine representing the Democrats in the Finance Committee..."

You're communicating the same facts, but instead of making it into some slam against Democrats in general, you make it into a rallying cry to progressives to support one of their champions.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

@NetRunner do you think Cenk would rather be right on this--or have Maxine Waters as the Chairperson of the Finance Committee?
It hasn't happened yet, but Cenk can see the wholly owned media positioning for it to happen--and he's showing us. Do you think that the article proposing exactly what Cenk predicted is a coincidence?

@NetRunner do you think Cenk would rather be right on this--or have Maxine Waters as the Chairperson of the Finance Committee?

It hasn't happened yet, but Cenk can see the wholly owned media positioning for it to happen--and he's showing us. Do you think that the article proposing exactly what Cenk predicted is a coincidence?

Forgetting for a moment Democrat Blarney Fwank was the Architect of the Housing Collapse...

Maxine Waters charged with multiple violations by the House Ethics committee from activities starting in 2004, refused to step down, re-elected in 2010, Ethics trial to start soon.

Charlie Rangel charged with multiple violations by the House Ethics committee from activities starting in 2007, refused to step down, re-elected in 2010, ethics trial since 2010, ongoing…..

William Jefferson charged with multiple counts of corruption in 2006, refused to step down, re-elected in 2007, convicted of multiple counts of corruption in 2009

Marion Barry charged with multiple counts of drug offenses and perjury and convicted in 1990, refused to step down, jailed in 1991, re-elected in 1994, still "serving"...

And don't forget Gerry Studds!

Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal, when he and Representative Dan Crane were each separately censured by the House of Representatives for an inappropriate relationship with a congressional page — in Studds' case, a 1983 homosexual relationship with a 17-year-old male.

There's good regulation and bad, good deregulation and bad. Look at how much airline prices fell after deregulation as a moderately successful example of how dereg can work. Look at the mess of the energy industry in California as an example of how not to dereg stuff. She comes off as a blithering idiot by claiming that all deregulation is bad, and that we should huzzah for more regulation (when regulation often has a severe chilling effect on an economy.)

It may sound odd coming from a libertarian, but there are times when you need more laws, and times when you need less. As a libertarian, I think that less is usually more, but laws ARE necessary instruments - anarchy is bad - and laws are important tools for dealing with fraud. Of course, you'll end up with situations where the cure (Sarbanes-Oxley) causes even more problems than the fraud it was trying to prevent (Enron-like schemes), AND have a chilling effect on the economy as well. I'm very grateful my corporations are small and not public, or the overhead of having to deal with it would drive me insane and really hurt our bottom line.

Having a byline that the GOP is responsible for the current mess is nearly fraudulent. It was the GOP that was calling for MORE regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and criminal idiots like Barney Frank and Maxine Waters were responsible for blocking it. They were as responsible as anyone in the government for our current mess, but the press gives them a complete pass.

DEMOCROOKS

$34,000: the amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and explanatory brochures that described his tax liabilities.

$75,000: the amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Costa Rican rental property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn't speak Spanish.

$93,000: the amount of petty cash each Congressional representative voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an economic meltdown.

$133,900: the amount Fannie Mae "invested" in Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also "invested" over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama.

$140,000: the amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities.

$356,000: the approximate amount of income and deductions that Daschle (D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the use of a car service, $83,333 in unreported income, and $14,963 in charitable contributions.

$800,000: the amount of "sweetheart" mortgages Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do so. Countrywide was once the nation's largest mortgage lender and linked to Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago in Pennsylvania, Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in mortgage assistance following "a state investigation that concluded that Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them."

$1,000,000: the estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton Foundation in an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous requests by government officials to turn it down.

$12,000,000: the amount of TARP money provided to community bank OneUnited despite the fact that it did not qualify for funds, and was "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses." It turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a key contributor to the Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank's ex-directors.

$23,500,000: The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV) accumulated in four years time according to The Washington Post through earmarks of "tens of millions of dollars to groups associated with his own business partners."

$2,000,000,000: ($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarking related to his son's lobbying efforts. Craig Obey is "a top lobbyist for the nonprofit group" that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the "Stimulus" package.

$3,700,000,000: ($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious conflict-of-interest as "a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms ."

$4,190,000,000: ($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called "Stimulus" package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN group under the auspices of "Community Stabilization Activities". ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio.

$1,646,000,000,000: ($1.646 trillion): the approximate amount of annual United States exports endangered by the "Stimulus" package, which provides a "Buy American" stricture. According to international trade experts, a "US-EU trade war looms", which could result in a worldwide economic depression reminiscent of that touched off by the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act.

Maxine Waters is a fking idiot.

The American people have spoken, and, in overwhelming numbers, they’ve said they want change.

Very well.

Just so we all know, here’s a partial list of the changes we’re likely to get more of:

* High Taxes
* Gun Control
* State ownership of capital
* Constitutional reconstructionism through the courts
* Nanny government and oppressive regulation
* A weak, impotent military
* Inept foreign policy
* Trial lawyers and liberal judges
* Socialism
* Internationalist subservience to the United Nations
* Socialized medical care
* Stronger labor unions
* Racism (hiring- and college enrolment quotas)
* Class warfare
* Voter fraud
* Lax immigration controls
* Wealth redistributionism
* Hostility towards business, and capitalism in general
* Over-aggressive environmentalism
* Support for failed social programs
* Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Pat Leahy, Maxine Waters, Jim McDermott, John Kerry, Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, and Dick Durbin running Congress.

So we’re going to get the changes we asked for, and we’re going to get them "good and hard".

He merely brought up the situation before Maxine Waters made her comment; there wasn't enough time to determine whether or not he had "fundamental knowledge of the situation." Aside from not knowing what the acronym stood for, what lack of fundamental knowledge of the situation did he demonstrate?

Don't get me wrong, I think the guy's a douche and much bullshit spewed forth from his mouth, but Maxine Water's comment rubbed me the wrong way; I think she wrong to have said it.

>> ^DavidRaine:
"Well if you don't know, then you shouldn't be talking about it."

>> ^Xax:
Bullshit. He doesn't know what the acronym stands for, so he shouldn't be talking about the voter fraud they attempted to perpetrate? That's just stupid.

I understand you're happy that Maxine Waters took a shot at him, but it was an idiotic comment. She's taking a shot at him for talking about voter fraud... why? Does she not have a problem with voter fraud? Or is voter fraud only bad when the other team is doing it?

I'm in agreement with Raaagh here -- It sounded like Steve Moore was lacking fundamental knowledge of the situation, rather than simply not knowing what the acronym stood for. It's another example of a talking head taking a talking point and trying to hammer it into the heads of the people he's talking at without regard for the situation. That's something I have a serious problem with. Instead of raising a serious point, blindly vomiting out the talking point divides people and takes time and resources away from the actual issues.

>> ^DavidRaine:
"Well if you don't know, then you shouldn't be talking about it."

AMEN.

Bullshit. He doesn't know what the acronym stands for, so he shouldn't be talking about the voter fraud they attempted to perpetrate? That's just stupid.

I understand you're happy that Maxine Waters took a shot at him, but it was an idiotic comment. She's taking a shot at him for talking about voter fraud... why? Does she not have a problem with voter fraud? Or is voter fraud only bad when the other team is doing it?

Blindly cheering for your team without regard for what you're actually cheering for is dumb, and should be reserved exclusively for Republicans.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'palin, bill maher, real time' to 'palin, bill maher, real time, dana gould, maxine waters, steve moore' - edited by my15minutes

Go to http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0184.html (for full article)

Excerpt:
US Rep. Johnson Joins 10 Others on Cheney Impeachment Bill
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, The Atlanta Progressive News (June 29, 2007)

(APN) ATLANTA – US Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA-04) has joined ten other Members of Congress in supporting H Res 333, a bill to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney.

"I believe it was time to send a message to the Vice President and to the Executive Branch as a whole," Congressman Johnson told Atlanta Progressive News in a statement issued verbally by spokesperson Deb Speights.

"I have certainly been displeased with the operations of the Executive Branch, particularly with regard to the secrecy, the incompetence, and the lack of cooperation that is coming out of the Vice President’s Office. I think the response to [reject] the subpoenas was the last straw," Johnson said.

Johnson was one of three US Reps to join the bill yesterday, and the only Georgia Member to have signed on so far. Johnson’s predecessor, US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), had been a strong supporter of impeachment, including, among other things, introducing her own Articles of Impeachment against President Bush at the end of her most recent term.

US Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) made a speech on the House Floor, “The Vice President Should Resign or Face Impeachment,” announcing his plans to support the bill. US Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) also joined yesterday.

The other total supporters include original sponsor, US Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), plus US Reps. Yvette Clarke (D-NY), William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Janice Schakowsky (D-IL), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Albert Wynn (D-MD), so far.

US Rep. John Lewis (D-GA-05) had said on WAOK radio in December 2005 he would sign a bill to impeach President Bush should it come across his desk. Lewis has not signed on to this bill even though the misdeeds of Cheney cited in H Res 333 would equally apply to Bush..