Jon Stewart Ambushes Rod Blagojevich

by Scott Creighton

Holding to his traditional role as “left” mouthpiece for the neoliberal status quo and the Obama/Rahm/Clinton/AIPAC junta, Jon Stewart ( born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz) ambushed Rod Blagojevich on his show the other night after Blago beat out 23 of 24 trumped-up charges  .

You think he would congratulate him, but instead he made a joke out of it and then tried to convict him in the court of public “left” opinion.

One of those charges Blago beat was “trying to sell the Illinois Senate seat” Obama had vacated.  Unbelievably, this charge remains after Barack Obama’s own investigation found that Blagojevich did NOT try to “sell the senate seat”. Yet Jon Stewart completely ignores all the facts surrounding the case and steadily berates Blagojevich, eventually stooping to insinuation that his guest was a “sociopath”

Blago stands wrongly accused of trying to sell the senate seat, still.  Which is unbelievable since Obama’s own investigation has revealed that neither Blagojevich or his people tried to work a deal for the senate seat.

The accounts support your statement on December 11, 2008 that you “have never spoken to the Governor on this subject [or] about these issues,” and that you “had no contact with the Governor’s office.” In addition, the accounts contain no indication of inappropriate discussions with the Governor or anyone from his office about a “deal” or a quid pro quo arrangement in which he would receive a personal benefit in return for any specific appointment to fill the vacancy.”  Transition Staff Contacts with the Governor’s Office, Dec. 2008

Mr. Harris did not make any effort to extract a personal benefit for the Governor in any of these conversations,” the report states. “There was no discussion of a cabinet position, of 501c(4), of a private sector position or of any other personal benefit to the Governor in exchange for the Senate appointment.”  American Everyman, January 3rd, 2009

Now you would think they might drop that charge after the Obama administration admitted that Blago didn’t try to “sell the senate seat” in public but since they really had nothing else, and since the MSM tried their best to bury that part of the story, I suppose they ran with it anyway. Jon Stewart seemed to “forget’ all about that little factoid himself…

“The charge of selling the senate seat. That vote was 11 to 1 against you. They may have said they didn’t prove their case but you are hitting .083 with the jurors… they came pretty close to proving their case.”  Jon Stewart

“You’re a guy that’s the most adamant about his innocence of anyone I ever met, so you’re either the victim of a terrible persecution or you’re a sociopath,” Stewart said. “I want to believe you’re not a sociopath, so you have to come out — and not on talk shows — in a court of law, and clear your name. You have to.”  Huffington Post Aug. 24, 2010

The definition of a sociopath is as follows: “a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.”

Stewart claimed Blago could be a sociopath because he had claimed he would take the stand and testify, but after seeing the weak case presented by the prosecution, he did not.

Is that the definition of a sociopath?

Interestingly, Jon Stewart has had on his show Marc Thiessen, Douglas Feith, John Yoo, John Bolton, Henry Kissinger, M. Albreight, and Rudolph Giuliani to name a few, but he never called any of them a “sociopath” to my knowledge. He never even suggested they could be a sociopath if they don’t testify in open court, whatever that means.

Kind of an odd behavioral pattern for a “liberal” isn’t it?

Continue reading

President Peace Prize Kills Three Children – The “Liberal” Progressives Yawn

US Drone Strike Destroys House Full of Children in Pakistan

by Jason Ditz, Raw Story

The Obama Administration’s policy of escalating drone strikes took another hit today, after the explosion from a drone attack against the house of “suspected militants” in North Waziristan also destroyed a neighboring house full of women and children.

The combined toll from the blast was 20 people killed, with at least four women and three children among the slain. At least 13 other civilians were also reported wounded, including a number of other children.

Pakistani intelligence officials say most of the “suspects” killed in the attacks were Afghans, but it is unclear how much evidence they had of wrongdoing. Large numbers of Afghan civilians have been living as refugees in the tribal areas since the 2001 US invasion.

The large numbers of civilians (700 in 2009 alone) killed in the US drone strikes has fueled considerable anti-American sentiment in Pakistan. When pressed during a previous visit Secretary of State Hillary Clinton shrugged off concerns about the civilians, saying only “there’s a war going on.”

[read ” Barack Obama is Not “the greatest man of our generation” ” from June 2, 2009]

What You Will Not Hear About Iraq

by Adil E. Shamoo, Information Clearinghouse

Iraq has between 25 and 50 percent unemployment, a dysfunctional parliament, rampant disease, an epidemic of mental illness, and sprawling slums. The killing of innocent people has become part of daily life. What a havoc the United States has wreaked in Iraq.

UN-HABITAT, an agency of the United Nations, recently published a 218-page report entitled State of the World’s Cities, 2010-2011. The report is full of statistics on the status of cities around the world and their demographics. It defines slum dwellers as those living in urban centers without one of the following: durable structures to protect them from climate, sufficient living area, sufficient access to water, access to sanitation facilities, and freedom from eviction.

Almost intentionally hidden in these statistics is one shocking fact about urban Iraqi populations. For the past few decades, prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the percentage of the urban population living in slums in Iraq hovered just below 20 percent. Today, that percentage has risen to 53 percent: 11 million of the 19 million total urban dwellers. In the past decade, most countries have made progress toward reducing slum dwellers. But Iraq has gone rapidly and dangerously in the opposite direction.

According to the U.S. Census of 2000, 80 percent of the 285 million people living in the United States are urban dwellers. Those living in slums are well below 5 percent. If we translate the Iraqi statistic into the U.S. context, 121 million people in the United States would be living in slums.

If the United States had an unemployment rate of 25-50 percent and 121 million people living in slums, riots would ensue, the military would take over, and democracy would evaporate. So why are people in the United States not concerned and saddened by the conditions in Iraq? Because most people in the United States do not know what happened in Iraq and what is happening there now. Our government, including the current administration, looks the other way and perpetuates the myth that life has improved in post-invasion Iraq. Our major news media reinforces this message.

[read the rest, here]

(you also won’t hear about this because the party or the segment of the population who are usually the ones who care about such things (human suffering, war crimes, crimes against humanity… that sort of thing) have gone silent on these matters because the Great Obama is in charge along with his DLC/New Dems/Clintonista neoliberals… and … there is an election coming up. The ONE THING the fake “progressives” care more about than the suffering of their fellow-man is “winning” the next election. Hypocrisy thy name is left.)