A daily compilation edited by Brent H. Baker, CyberAlert items are drawn from daily BiasAlert posts and distributed by the Media Research Center's News Analysis Division, the leader since 1987 in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias.
Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996
Friday May 21, 2010 @ 09:00 AM EDT1. NPR's Totenberg Touts Elena Kagan as Harvard's 'Superman'
Last Friday on TV, NPR legal reporter Nina Totenberg twice touted Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan as "spectacularly successful." But that was mellow compared to her Tuesday report for Morning Edition, where she enthusiastically pitched her record as dean of Harvard Law School as a Superman legend - listing her achievements over audio of the Superman theme music.
2. NBC and CBS Touted Lib Boycott of AZ; Silent on Offer to Turn Out L.A.'s Lights
All three broadcast evening newscasts have repeatedly touted, as if it is a valid representation of national sentiment, the "boycott" of Arizona by liberal municipalities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles. But when the Arizona Corporation Commissioner on Tuesday made a tongue-in-cheek offer to help Los Angeles out in its boycott by shutting off the electricity flow, CBS and NBC were silent.
3. Matthews: Is Obama Too Cool For His 'Nasty, Heated' Enemies Like Limbaugh?
Chris Matthews seemed a tad bit concerned about his man Barack Obama, on Thursday's Hardball, as the MSNBC host feared that the President was "too cool for his nasty, heated" enemies like Rush Limbaugh. Matthews -- who announced he is on Day 9 of his so far fruitless search for a Republican to appear on his show to slam the talk radio host -- worried that Obama wasn't getting angry enough at his critics. Matthews, who admitted he has a "heart for this guy" even went as far to ask his guest, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter, "is it still possible that he could find greatness as president?" Alter tried to assuage Matthews' fears by assuring him that Obama can "absolutely" achieve that greatness and claimed he had "a reasonably good chance of getting into that first rank of American presidents."
4. ABC Touts Calderon's 'Sharp Words' Swipe at U.S. for Inadequate Gun Laws
With "Sharp Words" forming the on-screen graphic, ABC anchor Diane Sawyer on Thursday night championed the domestic gun control argument espoused by a foreign leader trying to shift the blame for his nation's criminal activity, a remark neither CBS nor NBC found newsworthy: "Mexico's President Felipe Calderon today challenged a joint session of Congress on gun control, asking that they reinstate a ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004, saying 80 percent of the traceable weapons used in those crimes in Mexico, right across the border, come from the U.S."
5. MSNBC Slams Rand Paul: Eight Segments Totaling 37 Minutes Attacking the Republican as Racist
MSNBC on Thursday went on the offensive against Republican and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul. In a single day, the cable network devoted 37 minutes over eight segments to implying that the Senate candidate might be a racist. Throughout the day, MSNBC touted liberal guest after liberal guest to excoriate the politician. The lineup included Jesse Jackson, Democratic Congressman James Clyburn, liberal professors Boyce Watkins and Michael Eric Dyson and Democratic strategist Karen Finney.
6. CBS Allows Obama Official to Shift Oil Spill Blame to BP; NBC, ABC Morning Shows Grill Salazar
Early Show's Harry Smith on Thursday conducted a softball interview with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, allowing the Obama official to pass the oil spill blame to BP. He tossed this easy question to the cabinet member: "...The CEO of BP says the environmental impact in the gulf is going to be minimal. Is this guy in touch with reality?"
7. CBS's Chip Reid Snubbed by Obama...Again, Network's Broadcasts Still Mum
At the end of a joint press conference between President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon on Wenesday, CBS White House correspondent Chip Reid attempted to ask Obama a question about Tuesday's electoral results but was given the brush off for the second time in a week. On Monday, the President refused to answer a question from Reid moments after signing the "Press Freedom Act" into law. CBS morning and evening news broadcasts have ignored both the Monday and Wednesday snubs by Obama, with Reid only making his displeasure known online.
BEGIN AD
Tell the Liberal Media What You Really Think of Them!
It's time to take a stand against the continuous and deliberate bias in most major news outlets. Our democracy depends on a fair and truthful press, yet every day we are subjected to the liberal media propaganda machine supporting and defending liberal polices. It's time to speak up!
Get your FREE "I Don't Believe the Liberal Media!" bumper stickerEND AD
NPR's Totenberg Touts Elena Kagan as Harvard's 'Superman'
Last Friday on TV, NPR legal reporter Nina Totenberg touted Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan as "spectacularly successful" -- twice. But that was mellow compared to her Tuesday report for Morning Edition, where she enthusiastically pitched her record as dean of Harvard Law School as a Superman legend (The audio valentine is here):
NINA TOTENBERG: In some ways, the descriptions of Elena Kagan as dean sound a little bit like the beginning of the old "Superman" TV series.Some of the details are just as over the top with enthusiasm:
INTRO TO OLD SUPERMAN TV SHOW: Superman, who can change the course of mighty rivers, bend steel in his bare hands!
TOTENBERG: Translate that to Harvard, and you can almost hear the music. (Superman music in background)
Kagan, who can raise money by the millions!
Kagan, who can end the faculty wars over hiring!
Kagan, who won the hearts of students!
CHARLES OGLETREE: Oh, they loved her. In fact, when she did not get appointed as the university president, the students here at Harvard wore T-shirts around saying: I Love Dean Kagan.Do you have to be Superman to make a puddle of ice? The story wasn't entirely positive. Totenberg allowed that Kagan was known as an angry screamer:
TOTENBERG: Kagan famously did things to make student life nicer. Musing that winter was too long and dark, she had a wild idea, for instance: flood a grassy area on the campus, put hay bales around it, light it, and presto, an ice rink. It was a huge success, a student gathering place.
TOTENBERG: The cheerful, charming Kagan so beloved by the students was not always in evidence elsewhere. Secretaries and faculty members alike have stories of Kagan screaming at people, slamming doors and chewing out subordinates in public -- a trait that she is said to have carried with her to her next job as solicitor general. She's a yeller, conceded one of her friends with a smile. One of her admirers, Professor Tushnet, put it this way.So much for the idea that Kagan was going to be the next Justice Brennan in sweet-talking the justices on the right into building coalitions. Totenberg's story allowed no criticism from the right, only from the left.
MARK TUSHNET: Her weakness as a dean was that she really didn't like people to disagree with her. But that's not something that you can do in the Supreme Court.
Some on the left, however, said they stopped going to faculty meetings because they viewed discussion as truncated and disagreements as glossed over. Said one campus critic: I think she has a political heart. She wants to do good, but she has no soul, no center of gravity. So her heart can move depending on the political moment. While Kagan succeeded in bringing greater ideological diversity to the faculty, she was not nearly as successful in hiring more minorities and women.So the story wasn't all positive, but it was still tilted to the left. Can anyone imagine Totenberg would have considered a Sam Alito story featuring only criticism from conservatives?
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
NBC and CBS Touted Lib Boycott of AZ; Silent on Offer to Turn Out L.A.'s Lights
All three broadcast evening newscasts have repeatedly touted, as if it is a valid representation of national sentiment, the "boycott" of Arizona by liberal municipalities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles. But when the Arizona Corporation Commissioner on Tuesday made a tongue-in-cheek offer to help Los Angeles out in its boycott by shutting off the electricity flow, CBS and NBC were silent.
The only network to mention the proposal to test the depths of the city's commitment to liberal sanctimony was ABC, MRC intern Matthew Hadro discovered. White House correspondent Jake Tapper first noted how President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon both criticized Arizona's new immigration law at the White House, then reported:
JAKE TAPPER: The debate is intense. The Los Angeles City Council voted last month to boycott all official business in Arizona, prompting an Arizona utilities commissioner to all but threaten to cut off the electricity Arizona power plants provide L.A.All three broadcast networks have helped spread the word about liberals' displeasure with the Arizona law since it passed in late April, even though polls consistently show that most Americans think the law is a good idea. A sampling of the media's boycott boosterism, all previously reporter in MRC BiasAlerts:
GARY PIERCE, ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSIONER: You can't call a boycott on the candy store, and then decide to go in and pick and choose candy you really do want.
Andrea Mitchell on the April 26 Nightly News: "Anger over the law has gone viral. On Facebook today, pages like this one: 'Arizona, the Grand Canyon State, welcomes you unless you're a Mexican or look like one.' Calls for an economic boycott. Already a conference of immigration lawyers at a swanky Scottsdale hotel canceled."
Barbara Pinto on ABC's World News, April 26: "The call for an economic boycott has caught fire on the Internet — and even from an Arizona state representative warning conventioneers to stay away....The first to cancel their plans, 400 members of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, who will lose their $92,000 deposit."
Bill Whitaker on the CBS Evening News, April 29: "Arizona has gone through this kind of economic pressure before. In 1987, when the state refused to observe the national Martin Luther King holiday, there was a national boycott. The Super Bowl pulled out of Tempe. It all cost the state $300 million. Then, Arizona backed down. This time, state lawmakers plan to hang tough."
ABC correspondent Eric Horng on the May 1 World News: "Already, lawsuits have been filed challenging the law. Activists have called for a boycott of Arizona businesses and the state has been lampooned by comedians."
Jon Stewart on Comedy Central: "It's not unprecedented having to carry around your papers. It's the same thing that freed black people had to do in 1863."
CBS's Bill Whitaker, May 13 Evening News: "For every action in nature there's an opposite reaction, so, too, in politics. The city of Los Angeles, the latest to react strongly to Arizona's tough new anti-illegal immigration law. City council voted yesterday to ban city travel to Arizona, ban future contracts with Arizona businesses, and to check whether $58 million in existing contracts can be broken legally."
ABC's Diane Sawyer, May 13 World News: "All around the country, a kind of emotional civil war continues. Some people deciding to try to hit Arizona in the pocketbook. Today's developments from Barbara Pinto."
Barbara Pinto: "This is an out and out brawl, a nation choosing sides....Los Angeles now joins San Francisco and St. Paul, Minnesota, banning travel to the state....A list of boycotts costing Arizona an estimated $90 million so far. This heated debate is even playing out here at this suburban Chicago High School, 1,800 miles away. Administrators cancelled the Highland Park girls basketball team's trip to an Arizona tournament amid concerns about the new law."
In his letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Commissioner Pierce wrote:
If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy.You can read the full letter here.
People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070 [the immigration law]. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.
—Rich Noyes is Research Director at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.
Matthews: Is Obama Too Cool For His 'Nasty, Heated' Enemies Like Limbaugh?
Chris Matthews seemed a tad bit concerned about his man Barack Obama, on Thursday's Hardball, as the MSNBC host feared that the President was "too cool for his nasty, heated" enemies like Rush Limbaugh. Matthews -- who announced he is on Day 9 of his so far fruitless search for a Republican to appear on his show to slam the talk radio host -- worried that Obama wasn't getting angry enough at his critics.
Matthews, who admitted he has a "heart for this guy" even went as far to ask his guest, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter, "is it still possible that he could find greatness as president?" Alter tried to assuage Matthews' fears by assuring him that Obama can "absolutely" achieve that greatness and claimed he had "a reasonably good chance of getting into that first rank of American presidents." [video available here][audio available here]
The following is a full transcript of the interview segment as it was aired on the May 20 edition of Hardball:
CHRIS MATTHEWS TEASING SEGMENT: Up next, the right wing constantly goes to absurd extremes to demean President Obama. I mean absurd. They'll call him anything. Nazi, Soviet. They don't limit it. What do we make of it? Amid the madness the President just stays cool as a cucumber. Is he too cool for his nasty, heated enemy?—Geoffrey Dickens is the Senior News Analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here
...
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to Hardball. The right wing has made it their mission, it seems, to undercut President Obama, to smear him at every chance. Rush Limbaugh has been leading the charge. Here's some of Rush, just today.
(Begin clip)
RUSH LIMBAUGH: The Democrat Party, the American left, the President of the United States will destroy this party and destroy this country, in order to maintain their power over it. This is the kind of stuff that starts civil wars, folks. You want to know what happened to prosperity? It's called liberalism. There's a giant disconnect - liberalism from Americanism. What country does Barack Obama believe he is president of?
(End clip)
MATTHEWS: He's unbelievable. Remember by the way, we have an open invitation to any Republican officeholder, any respectable one to come on this show and say Rush is wrong. That Rush is not the leader of the Republican Party. By the way you can pick your target. Any nuance you disagree with him on. Any small point, any peccadillo you find in this guy's argument. Just come on and tell us you disagree with that. So far, nine days since we offered the challenge, no takers.
Anyway despite the noise, President Obama stays on an even keel. And it's his cool calm reality that's become his trademark. But can he always be this cool? Jonathan Alter has just written a big book. He examined President Obama's first year in office with incredible, behind the scenes access. His new book, what a great name, The Promise. Jonathan, my man who studied with great effect Franklin Roosevelt, and the big guys.
Does he still...We have a lot of very pro-Obama viewers that watch this program, and some critics. And the question for the people with heart, and I'm one of them, with heart for this guy, and I'm a critic sometimes. If you have heart for Obama is it still possible that he could find greatness as president? Do you see it?
JONATHAN ALTER, NEWSWEEK: Oh absolutely! I mean look they, he won ugly on health care, Chris. But this was the biggest domestic achievement in close to half a century. And he is with only Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson now, in terms of domestic achievement. It can all go wrong if unemployment doesn't come down over four years. It can go wrong if it's disastrous in Afghanistan. But has a reasonably good chance of getting into that first rank of American presidents.
MATTHEWS: Well let's talk about his temperament and the way he presents himself. During the campaign, we were all impressed, when I was going nuts, saying, "When's he gonna take on Senator Clinton? When's he gonna really challenge her?"
ALTER: Yeah!
MATTHEWS: And all the time he was plotting with David Plouffe to get the delegates he needed in those little states out west. So he had a plan Does he have a plan now? All we see is the cool.
ALTER: Yeah.
MATTHEWS: What's his plan to get the unemployment rate down to seven? What's his plan to restore his connection with the blue collar worker out there and the middle class worker who's either, out of work or worried about being thrown out of work. How does he connect again?
ALTER: He needs to, he needs to connect. That was the big failure of the first year. He lost that connection to independents and a chunk of the middle class. He's still pretty popular, his numbers are close to what he won in the election. But, but something has atrophied there in his connection with people and they're very conscious of it and they're getting him out on the road more to deal with this. But he doesn't want to throw a punch. And a lot of liberals want to see him deck somebody.
MATTHEWS: Yeah, yeah.
ALTER: He's not into gestures, he's into winning and putting points on the board, as they put it. But sometimes he can be a little too cool.
MATTHEWS: Yeah.
ALTER: And Paul Volcker told me, for instance said, he said, sometimes he wants to just shake the President, say "God dammit get excited about this!"
MATTHEWS: Okay I agree. By the way I've heard that from people close to him. Here's a Boston Globe piece that gets to the heart of this. This is about Martha Coakley who had a tin ear, I think. A nice person, probably professionally great. But had a tin ear, politically. Here's what the Globe said about her when she lost. "Coakley bristles at the suggestion that with so little time left in an election with such high stakes she is being too passive. 'As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park, in the cold? shaking hands?' she fires back." Well it's like Obama is like that. Here's Obama speaking at the White House Correspondents Dinner the other night. And this didn't bother me at the time, we were all laughing. But later I began to think Obama is like that. This didn't bother me at the time, we're all laughing and later I began to think, this is the wrong tone. Let's listen.
(Begin clip)
BARACK OBAMA: Unfortunately, John McCain couldn't make it. Recently, he claimed that he had never identified himself as a maverick. And we all know what happens in Arizona when you don't have ID. Adios amigos!
(End clip)
MATTHEWS: Overwhelming the American people are completely frustrated by our failure to protect American citizenship and residents at the border. We're not doing it. And every other country does it, we don't do it. He's joking about it. He's laughing at Arizona. Is that, is that connection with the middle class and independent voter?
ALTER: That, that probably was not very smart to joke about it, but it was nothing compared to what Coakley did with, less than two weeks before the election, to dis Fenway Park, which is, which is a shrine in Boston?
MATTHEWS: I know.
ALTER: And so when Obama heard this, Axelrod told him this, when he wandered into his office, and he grabbed Axelrod's shirt, and he said, "Tell me she didn't say that, tell me that's not true." He knew immediately, not only that Coakley was gonna lose but that health care was in, in deep trouble.
MATTHEWS: Jon.
ALTER: So what I try to do in the book, Chris, is to take people behind those closed doors.
MATTHEWS: Jon we're out of time. Jon please come back again. You'll come back and talk about this, this book is gonna be a big one, The Promise by Jonathan Alter.
ABC Touts Calderon's 'Sharp Words' Swipe at U.S. for Inadequate Gun Laws
With "Sharp Words" forming the on-screen graphic, ABC anchor Diane Sawyer on Thursday night championed the domestic gun control argument espoused by a foreign leader trying to shift the blame for his nation's criminal activity, a remark neither CBS nor NBC found newsworthy:
Mexico's President Felipe Calderon today challenged a joint session of Congress on gun control, asking that they reinstate a ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004, saying 80 percent of the traceable weapons used in those crimes in Mexico, right across the border, come from the U.S.Viewers then heard from Calderon: "I admire the American Constitution, but many of these guns are not going to honest American hands. Instead, thousands are ending up in the hands of criminals."
Without questioning his statistical claim, Sawyer then observed "Democrats gave him a standing ovation" while "Republicans sat silently," a disparity which illustrated how Calderon's polemics, which ABC decided to highlight, matches a quest of liberal Democrats.
From the Thursday, May 20 ABC World News:
DIANE SAWYER: And Mexico's President Felipe Calderon today challenged a joint session of Congress on gun control, asking that they reinstate a ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004, saying 80 percent of the traceable weapons used in those crimes in Mexico, right across the border, come from the U.S.— Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
CALDERON: I admire the American Constitution, but many of these guns are not going to honest American hands. Instead, thousands are ending up in the hands of criminals.
SAWYER: Democrats gave him a standing ovation. Republicans sat silently.
MSNBC Slams Rand Paul: Eight Segments Totaling 37 Minutes Attacking the Republican as Racist
MSNBC on Thursday went on the offensive against Republican and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul. In a single day, the cable network devoted 37 minutes over eight segments to implying that the Senate candidate might be a racist.
Each piece featured a clip of Paul's appearance on Wednesday's Rachel Maddow program in which the MSNBC host suggested the libertarian candidate would tolerate bigotry because he opposes government regulation.
Throughout the day, MSNBC touted liberal guest after liberal guest to excoriate the politician. The lineup included Jesse Jackson, Democratic Congressman James Clyburn, liberal professors Boyce Watkins and Michael Eric Dyson and Democratic strategist Karen Finney.
There were no conservative guests on to defend Mr. Paul, who, while talking to Maddow, questioned the effectiveness of parts of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
During the 3pm hour, Mr. Watkins smeared, "I'm a fellow Kentuckian, just like Rand Paul. And I'm familiar with that brand of very subtle racism." Dyson berated, "Well, I think that [Paul] is a very disturbing figure...I think the reality is this does expose an undergirding, underlying, you know, racist vitriol."
Democratic strategist Finney gloated, "It is obviously an embarrassment for the tea party folks and the Republican Party." In a tease for the 1pm hour, host Andrea Mitchell hopefully suggested the candidate's interview with Maddow could be a "a game changing interview."
She didn't note that Paul has jumped to a 25 point lead over his Democratic opponent. MSNBC will have quite a ways to go before they can create a "game changing" event.
In the 2pm hour, anchor Tamron Hall chided, "A lot of people want Rand Paul to go back and clear up his words or change his words. If this is where he stands, if this is what he means, why not let him stick by it and suffer? If there are ramifications for it- then he has to deal with it."
The eight segments appeared this way: One in the 9am hour of the Daily Rundown. One in the 10am, 11am and 12pm hours of News Live. Another one during the 1pm hour of Andrea Mitchell Reports. Two more reports over the 2pm hour of News Live. Yet another in the show's 3pm edition.
A transcript of the segment in the 2pm hour, which aired at 2:21pm on May 20, follows:
RAND PAUL: I'm not in favor of any discrimination in any form. I would not belong to a club that excludes anybody for race. We still do have private clubs in America can discriminate based on race. But, I think what is important in this debate is not getting into any specific gotcha on this, but asking the question, what about freedom of speech? Should we limit speech from people we find abhorrent? Should we limit racists from speaking? I don't want to be associated with those people but I also don't want to limit their speech in any way.—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
TAMRON HALL: And we have been discussing Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul under fire for controversial comments he made regarding the 1964 Civil Rights Act on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show last night and elsewhere. He questioned provisions of the law Today, Rand Paul issued a statement saying, quote, "Let me be clear. I support the Civil Rights Act. Joining me to talk about it, Georgetown University sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson. Also with us, Democratic strategist and MSNBC political analyst Karen Finney. So, Karen and Professor Dyson, we just showed a clip. But, it was really a hot moment last night. She really pressing Rand Paul. He kept saying that he's not a racist , but he wanted to make the separation the rights a private business has over something that is considered public. Karen, what's your take on what he had to say?
KAREN FINNEY: You know, whether or not you believe he is racist, even with the explanation that he gave today, while that was politically a smart thing to do, he really didn't address the fundamental problem with what most of us have with what he said. And that is this idea that, like, so private companies can decide what laws they follow and which ones they don't. So, does that mean BP gets to choose? Does that mean Toyota gets to choose and it is okay if they put out cars that are unsafe and may actually kill people? I mean, so, again, whether or not you think he is racist, there is a more fundamental argument that he really hasn't responded to.
HALL: Professor Dyson, it's interesting. A lot of people want Rand Paul to go back and clear up his words or change his words. If this is where he stands, if this is what he means, why not let him stick by it and suffer? If there are ramifications for it, then he has to deal with it.
MICHAEL ERIC DYSON: Absolutely. I think it is not about political correctness in its garbled form. It is about the degree to which Mr. Rand [sic] is incapable of understanding that in this day and age, those who oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the, you know, Voting Rights Act or, three years later, the Fair Housing Act are the very people that stand against the best interests of American democracy. And I don't think we should have less speech, but more. I agree with him. Even though I abhor the speech of racists, I certainly want the freedom to be able to hear them and for them to be able to speak so we can make just decisions based upon our analysis of their abhorrent ideas and suggest that they are outside the mainstream of American society.
HALL: His point is that he believes the federal government has far overreached in its power grab. That is what he says, Karen, was the heart of what he is articulating. But, obviously hitting a hot button issue when you say that someone can't sit at a lunch counter because they are black or Latino or a woman.
FINNEY: Well, that's exactly right. And, actually, last night on an interview with NPR, he applied the same standard to the Americans with Disability Act. So, again, if you sort of extrapolate and follow his logic, it is not just about 1964 and the Voting Rights Act, we are talking about a fundamental American value. And that is, we don't discriminate, whether it is race, religion, gender, sexual orientation. We don't do that as Americans. And if he seeks to be a senator in the United States of America, he has got to be clear about where he stands on this issue. It is obviously an embarrassment for the tea party folks and the Republican Party. You saw, today, Mitch McConnell even trying to help clean this up a little bit.
HALL: Professor Dyson, in your thoughts what does this tell us about Rand Paul?
DYSON: Well, I think that he is a very disturbing figure. I think the attempt to dismiss is this is as ill-conceived as his ill-chosen words. I think the reality is this does expose an undergirding, underlying, you know, racist vitriol. Now, it doesn't have to be personal racial animus. But, these kind of outdated viewpoints that are defended by ostensibly by conservative or libertarian outlook misses the larger point. Without that 1964 act, without the voting rights act, without the laws where the government has stood behind vulnerable American citizens, one group of Americans would have overtaken others. And it amazes me that libertarians and conservatives want to keep the government from swelling, except they want to be able to tell people who they can marry. They want to dictate the terms of debate between disagreeing Americans and they want to preserve, I think, a tremendous preserve of, I think, privilege for those who have locked out. And I think until we understand that the government's intervention was the very means by which we had a free and a just America for black people, we're not even talking serious truth about American politics.
CBS Allows Obama Official to Shift Oil Spill Blame to BP; NBC, ABC Morning Shows Grill Salazar
Early Show's Harry Smith on Thursday conducted a softball interview with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, allowing the Obama official to pass the oil spill blame to BP. He tossed this easy question to the cabinet member: "...The CEO of BP says the environmental impact in the gulf is going to be minimal. Is this guy in touch with reality?"
In contrast, hosts on NBC's Today and ABC's Good Morning America grilled Salazar during similar segments on their shows. Surprisingly, it was GMA's George Stephanopoulos who most stridently demanded answers.
He complained, "You gave BP and other oil companies permits without getting the proper clearances. You failed to conduct four monthly inspections of the rig over the last year."
Stephanopoulos continued, "Are these failures your responsibility? You were secretary at the time." CBS's Smith, however, never asked how responsible the department and the Obama administration are. He also ignored criticism from Republican Congressman John Mica of Florida.
Stephanopoulos didn't avoid the subject. He played the following clip of Mica and forced Salazar to respond to it:
REP. JOHN MICA: I call this the Obama oil spill time line. I think this is the first time we have a public copy of this. This is their approval. It's basically a carte blanche recipe for disaster.Over on NBC's Today, host Meredith Vieira grilled, "On Capitol Hill this week you acknowledged that the Interior Department had been lax in policing offshore drilling activities and had been weakened by corruption. So, do you now take responsibility, sir, at least in part, for what's happened in the gulf?"
After not getting an answer, Vieira tried again: "So, do you take direct responsibility for what's happened here?"
The best Smith could do was highlight the need for images of how much oil has spilled out. He observed, "But, here we are a month later, Mr. Secretary, I know your agencies have asked for these pictures and BP has not provided them. Why not? Are they in charge out there?"
This still but the onus on BP. The Early Show host continued to place the blame on the company: "Are you satisfied they are using, at least, the proper methods to try and disperse this oil?"
Only CBS allowed the Secretary to get away with such responsibility shifting. For instance, Stephanopoulos highlighted the numerous problems with the response and scolded, "It sounds like you're shifting the blame back. These [problems] all happened on your watch."
Now, ABC and NBC shouldn't be praised too much for finally challenging the Obama response. After all, the disaster is a month old. However, unlike the Early Show, at least they are doing it, albeit belatedly.
A transcript of the Stephanopoulos' interview with Salazar, which occurred at 7:14am EDT, follows:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: And for more on this, we're joined by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar down in Washington. Thank you for joining us, Mr. Secretary. You talk about everything we're doing. Yet, we still can't get an accurate measure of the flow out of British Petroleum. You know, you see some scientists estimate it could be five or ten-times, maybe more, than what BP is giving right now. Why can't we get an accurate estimate from BP? And will you demand it?—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
KEN SALAZAR (Interior Secretary): The answer is, we will get accurate numbers. We will not just rely on BP. We have our own efforts underway with NASA and other federal agencies, NOAA, the USGS, to make sure that we have accurate numbers. We need to have those numbers with respect to natural resource damages and a whole host of other things.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But, sir- Excuse me. We're 31 days into this now. Why can't we get an accurate estimate?
SALAZAR: Yeah- there is a problem, in terms of the sub sea because you're 5,000 feet below. The robots that are working down there are working on what the immediate crisis and problem is. And that is stopping the source. Until we get this geyser stopped at the bottom of the ocean, it's going to continue to spread. And, so, the efforts have been focused on bringing the spill under control. And that essentially means killing the well. And, so, everything we have is being thrown at that particular problem. We will have good numbers for the American people and for everybody else. And they will be independent from B.P.
STEPHANOPOULOS: When?
SALAZAR: It's a matter of days to complete the satellite imagery and to make sure that we have good numbers that are out there. We have good numbers relative to the amount of oil that is now being collected through the so-called riser insertion tube, where there's approximately 3,000 barrels a day that are being collected and not going out to sea. So, we can give the numbers. In terms of how much oil has openly spilled into the Gulf Coast, I can assure you we're going to have good numbers that will be put together by NASA, by USGS, by NOAA and others who are working on this.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You took some heat yesterday on Capitol Hill. Congressman John Mica of Florida, pointed out that your department gave BP a categorical exclusion last year from environmental regulations. Listen to what he said.
REP. JOHN MICA: I call this the Obama oil spill time line. I think this is the first time we have a public copy of this. This is their approval. It's basically a carte blanche recipe for disaster.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Carte blanche recipe for disaster. And that's not all. You gave BP and other oil companies permits without getting the proper clearances. You failed to conduct four monthly inspections of the rig over the last year. Approved dozens of projects without the right permits. Are these failures your responsibility? You were secretary at the time.
SALAZAR: You know, I think Congressman Mica should understand that this is not about finger-pointing. But, it's about solving an immediate problem. And the fact of it is there's responsibility to go around, from the companies to Congress, to the executive branch. The Congress is the one that mandates there be a 30-day approval of the exploration plans. And it's Congress has had that law in place for a number of years. And, so, Congress has a responsibility to step up and also to reform the laws of this country relative to the requirements of the development of energy in the outer continental shelf.
STEPHANOPOULOS: It sounds like you're shifting the blame back. These all happened on your watch.
SALAZAR: George- George- George, I'm not shifting the blame. I'm saying, we have responsibility here in the Department of Interior. We have been on a reform agenda from day one.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, sir, are you optimistic about efforts to cap the well on Sunday?
SALAZAR: You know, I am very hopeful that will happen. But, it's not risk-free. There's a possibility it will not happen on Sunday. But, right now, the schedule is to go ahead and do the so-called dynamic kill and finally put this thing to bed on Sunday. At least with respect to this first phase.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay, Mr. Secretary, thank you for your time this morning.
SALAZAR: Thank you, George.
ROBIN ROBERTS: Everyone's patience wearing thin on this right now.
CBS's Chip Reid Snubbed by Obama...Again, Network's Broadcasts Still Mum
At the end of a joint press conference between President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon on Wenesday, CBS White House correspondent Chip Reid attempted to ask Obama a question about Tuesday's electoral results but was given the brush off for the second time in a week.
Later that afternoon, Reid described the incident on CBSNews.com's Political Hotsheet blog: "As he [Obama] and President Calderon turned to walk back toward the Oval Office I asked, loudly enough for him to hear, if he had any comment on the elections. No response. I then shouted 'Do you have any plans for a real press conference?' No response, not that I expected one."
On Monday, the President refused to answer a question from Reid moments after signing the "Press Freedom Act" into law.
CBS morning and evening news broadcasts have ignored both the Monday and Wednesday snubs by Obama, with Reid only making his displeasure known online.
In his Wednesday blog post, Reid noted:
...so-called 'press conferences' with foreign leaders usually allow for only two questions from the White House press corps and two from foreign reporters. But today he [Obama] said there was time for only one from each side. And in what I suspect was a White House effort to assure that the questioning was limited to immigration and other issues of U.S.-Mexico concern, he called on the Univision reporter from the U.S. side.Reid even indignantly declared: "So if his goal was to avoid answering any tough questions about yesterday's elections, or the oil spill in the Gulf, or financial regulation, or Iran, or Afghanistan -- he succeeded."
On Wednesday's Evening News, Reid was given the perfect opportunity to voice his grievances on air, when anchor Katie Couric asked: "Chip, how is the White House assessing or spinning yesterday's election results?" However, Reid declined, simply repeating talking points put out by Obama's press office:
Well, Katie, the spin from the White House is that this was a very good day, but they're focusing almost exclusively on that race in southwestern Pennsylvania, where the Democrat beat a Republican. They say it shows that a Democrat in a district where Obama is not very popular can win and they say that's good news for November. They may not lose as many seats as they had feared. Katie.—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Fwd: MRC Alert: NPR's Totenberg Touts Elena Kagan as Harvard's 'Superman'
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Fwd: Morning Bell: Dodd Bill is Just the Beginning of 'Too Big to Fail'
05/20/2010
Dodd Bill is Just the Beginning of 'Too Big to Fail'
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) failed to end debate on Sen. Chris Dodd's (D-CT) financial regulation bill yesterday when two Democrats broke ranks to vote with conservatives. The Dodd bill is already is already a big government monstrosity, expanding powers for existing Washington regulators as well as creating and empowering new ones. But frightened by the defeat of Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and the near defeat of Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) issued statements following their "no" voted demanding that the bill further increase the power of Washington bureaucrats.
Specifically, Cantwell wants to criminalize violations of the bill's extremely complex new derivatives provisions, and Feingold is demanding the resurrection of Depression Era prohibitions on banking diversification. Not only has our federal government already criminalized the violation of far too many arcane regulations, but the derivatives provisions already in the bill are sure to drive investment, jobs and revenues out of our domestic markets and into foreign ones. And Feingold's claims that restoration of the Glass-Steagall would prevent "too big to fail" bear no relation to reality. None of the major entities at the core of the 2008 financial crisis would have been affected by Glass-Steagall because none of them are commercial banks. Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac all dug their financial crisis graves by making terrible decisions that would have been perfectly legal under a Glass-Steagall regime.
Fwd: MRC Alert: Nets All Showcase Fearful 2nd Grader's Question to FLOTUS on Lacking 'Papers,' ABC Heralds It As 'Poignant'
A daily compilation edited by Brent H. Baker, CyberAlert items are drawn from daily BiasAlert posts and distributed by the Media Research Center's News Analysis Division, the leader since 1987 in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias.
Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996
Thursday May 20, 2010 @ 09:48 AM EDT1. Nets All Showcase Fearful 2nd Grader's Question to FLOTUS on Lacking 'Papers,' ABC Heralds It As 'Poignant'
ABC, CBS and NBC all showcased a second grader's question to First Lady Michelle Obama, about her apparently illegal mother. The girl pleaded: "Barack Obama is taking everybody away that doesn't have papers," but "my mom doesn't have papers." ABC suggested it demonstrates the need for immigration "reform" as anchor Diane Sawyer proposed "a child's fear brings a new focus to the debate" since "the First Lady had to respond to a child's poignant question" which, reporter Jake Tapper relayed, "immigration reform advocates called...the most meaningful exchange of the day." With "THE QUESTION" on screen (jpg), NBC anchor Brian Williams teased: "The question that a little girl asked Michelle Obama that put her smack in the middle of a big debate."2. Politico's Mike Allen on MSNBC: GOP 'Steamroller' Stopped, Dems 'Off the Mat'
During Wednesday's 10AM EST hour on MSNBC, Politico's Mike Allen shared his thoughts on Tuesday's electoral results: "Stop the steamroller. The idea the Republicans were automatically going to be in control going into November, now not true....a Democrat winning the only Democrat-Republican showdown of yesterday in a congressional seat in Pennsylvania. The Republicans should have won." He went on to proclaim a potential comeback for Democrats: "This is a tough day for Republicans. For a long time they've been feeling their oats, as my grandmother would say, and now the Democrats are up off the mat a little bit. They have a talking point. They say 'we do see a map to win.'"3. ABC's Robin Roberts Hits Rand Paul for 'Private Country Club' Victory Party
Good Morning America's Robin Roberts on Wednesday oddly highlighted Rand Paul's Senate primary victory party at a country club as an indicator that he's not a real outsider. After informing the Republican that voters are "tired of how Washington is," she derided, "Some people find it a bit ironic that your victory party last night was at a private country club in Kentucky. Doesn't that kind of send a mixed message there?"4. CBS's Rodriguez to Rand Paul: What About Dems Who Say You're 'Way Too Controversial'?
In an interviewing with senate primary winner Rand Paul on Wednesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez asked the Kentucky Republican about Democratic spin: "What do you say to Democrats who actually are happy about your victory in this primary?...ready to pounce on you in the general election, saying that your views are way too controversial and they could take this Republican seat?" Paul dismissed the idea and noted the unpopularity of Washington Democrats in the state: "I say, bring it on, and please, please bring President Obama to Kentucky. We'd love for him to campaign down here."
Fwd: Budget Bulletin: The Tax Cuts Didn't Cause the Budget Deficit
SAFE Act Would Cap Growth of Government Obama's "Line-Item Veto" Really Just Tweaking Existing Authority The Tax Cuts Didn't Cause the Budget Deficit
By Brian Riedl
With the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of this year, President Obama and Congress face the prospect of overseeing a historic tax increase.
If nothing is done, the $1,000 child tax credit will fall to $500, and the marriage penalty will be re-imposed. Low-income families will see their income tax rate jump five percentage points, while everyone else will see increases of three to 4.6 percentage points. Capital gains and dividends tax rates — currently 15 percent for most investors — will leap to 20 percent and 39.6 percent, respectively. The death tax, which is finally gone, will be re-imposed at a 55 percent rate.
Such large tax increases would clearly hammer families and businesses. They would also severely damage the fragile economy. Virtually no economic school of thought advocates raising taxes during a recession, and this massive tax increase could shatter the modest and shaky economic recovery.
Yet among tax-increase advocates, it has become an article of faith that President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts caused the budget deficit. Newsweeks Fareed Zakaria echoed this conventional wisdom recently: "The Bush tax cuts are the single largest part of the black hole that is the federal budget deficit." Similarly, in 2004, when Sen. John Kerry , Massachusetts Democrat, accused Mr. Bush of having "taken a $5.6 trillion surplus and turned it into deficits as far as the eye can see," he focused on "Bush's unaffordable tax cuts for the wealthiest people."
These assertions are demonstrably false.
>> Click here to read Brian Riedl's full report
Get more charts with Heritage's Federal Revenue and Spending Book of Charts
The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC 20002 | 202.546.4400
Fwd: Small Businesses v. Obamacare
Small Businesses v. Obamacare
The National Federation of Independent Business, representing the interests of small businesses across America, recently joined more 20 states on the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare. The move is the latest blow to President Obama's post-passage public relations effort.
NFIB's involvement was prompted by the individual and employer mandates, new taxes and onerous paperwork requirements. An accompanying statement said the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would devastate small business, threatening their viability.
The Scoop
The lawsuit's two main legal claims involve the unconstitutionality of the individual mandate.
Last month Heritage's John Ligon documented how Obamacare penalizes small businesses: higher health care costs, an ineffective small business tax credit, higher regulation compliance costs, and Medicare taxes on "flow-through" and investment income.
NFIB chief executive Dan Danner said the law simply went too far:
"We want to make it very clear: NFIB has a long history of working on and supporting healthcare reform. We are not part of the 'Just say no' crowd. Small businesses DO need reforms that help to reduce costs and increase choices. We have encouraged reforms that cover pre-existing conditions, help to create effective and affordable national exchanges, provide the ability to buy across state lines, and include liability reform. But this new law resulted in more bad than good for our nation's job creators. And this law is a bridge too far in terms of the future of our constitutional freedoms and liberties."
So what makes the NFIB's involvement important? The fact that small firms represent 99.7 percent of all employers, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration, sends a strong message Obama.
forward message or visit our website
The White House has launched a taxpayer-funded Web site to "reality check" credible criticisms and arguments. Problem is the Obama administration's videos "debunking" each "myth" are low on facts. Click here to see our response. The Heritage Foundation - 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC
Call us at 202 546 4400
Fwd: Senate Democratic Whip Compares Sealing the Mexican Border to Trying to Keep Drugs Off of I-95
Today's Headlines Thursday, May 20, 2010
Advertisement
Revealed: 3 Unknown Penny Stocks Set to Soar 300% - Free Report
How would you like to know the names of 3 penny stocks set to rocket up 300% -- or more? Well, you can have those 3 stock symbols today - 100% free!
These three penny stocks should make early investors a fortune. Wall Street fat cats are on the hunt for these revolutionary companies. But guess what - they're already too late!
You see, by the time they notice the 3 picks revealed in this exclusive free report, you'll already be in line to see enormous returns…
Claim Your 3 Free Penny Stocks Picks Here
Senate Democratic Whip Compares Sealing the Mexican Border to Trying to Keep Drugs Off of I-95
Washington (CNSNews.com) - Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the effort to secure the U.S.-Mexico border is like trying to guarantee that "no narcotics and no guns are going to pass illegally" along I-95, a major East Coast highway. "Imagine the challenge that would pose to any governmental unit trying to enforce it," Durbin said.
Mexican President Denounces Arizona Law Despite Laws Against Illegal Immigration in His Own Country
(CNSNews.com) – At a joint press conference in the White House Rose Garden on Wednesday, President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon criticized Arizona's new law against illegal immigration. In Calderon's Mexico, however, illegal immigration is punished with fines and deportations.
Obama Says Administration Taking 'Very Close Look' at Arizona's Immigration Law for Civil Rights 'Implications'
(CNSNews.com) - President Barack Obama said his administration is taking a "very close look" at Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law, examining it for any "implications, especially for civil rights." He did not say whether he's read the law.
Sestak Has 'Moral Imperative' to Answer Questions on White House Job Offer, GOP Congressman Says
(CNSNews.com) – Fresh off his win over incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary, Rep. Joe Sestak should still be obligated to answer questions about a job he says the White House offered to him if he agreed not to run against Specter in the primary, a leading House Republican said. "Could the reason why Congressman Joe Sestak refuses to name names is because the very people who tried to bribe him are now his benefactors?" Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said in a statement Wednesday.
Accused of Sinking South Korean Ship, North Korea Threatens 'All-Out War'
(CNSNews.com) – Tensions rose on the Korean peninsula Thursday after South Korea accused North Korea of torpedoing its warship in March, drawing a sharp response and threats of "all-out war" from Pyongyang. The U.S. and Japanese governments quickly voiced support for South Korea, with the White House condemning the North Korean "act of aggression."
Ahead of White House Visit, Lebanese PM Meets With Syrian President, Seeks Talks With Hezbollah Leader
(CNSNews.com) – Preparing for his first official visit to Washington next week, Lebanon's U.S.-backed Prime Minister Saad Hariri has held "coordination" talks with Syrian President Bashir Assad and reportedly plans to meet Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. The U.S. government has listed Hezbollah as a "foreign terrorist organization" since the FTO designation was first established in 1996.
Democratic Leader Hoyer Doesn't Know Whether Obama Administration was Prepared for Oil Spill
(CNSNews.com) – House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said he did not know whether the Obama administration was prepared to combat the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Hoyer also said it was "accurate" that the federal government had not been properly checking up on British Petroleum and its oil rigs
.
CNSNEWS.COM VIDEO
OTHER CNSNEWS.COM HEADLINES
National Science Agency Presses for Carbon Tax; Calls 'Global Warming' an 'Urgent Threat'
Some Small Businesses Feel Misled by Obama Health Care Law
North Korea Crisis Looms As Clinton Heads to Asia
Senators Press for National Guard Troops on Border
Elena Kagan's Papers Shed Light on Nominee's Personality
Homosexual Couple Gets Maximum 14-Year Sentence in Malawi
Three Americans Jailed in Iran Meet With Their Mothers
Senate Fails to End Debate on Bank Regulation Bill
Singer Elvis Costello Cancels Concerts in Israel
Paintings Worth Millions Stolen in Paris
UK's Cameron, Clegg Finalize Coalition Deal; Vow 'Close and Frank' Ties With U.S.
China to Train Pandas to Survive in Wild
Donate Today!
Please help CNSNews.com keep bringing you 'The Right News - Right Now!'
Make a contribution to CNSNews.com today. It's fast, simple and secure.
Help CNSNews.com and Donate Today!
NEWSPAPER ROUNDUP:
Costa Mesa declares itself a 'rule of law' community, not a sanctuary city
Low-speed electric vehicles are low-safety, watchdog group warns
Pentagon wants homosexual troops to weigh in on 'don't ask' policy
In the bayou, fish and oil have mixed for decades
Wash Post says Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is poised to become majority leader
Small businesses' credit card rates now 13.7% higher
Scientist booted off oil panel over his non-PC views on gays, diversity
Louisiana bill would bar government from burdening the free exercise of religion
Switchblade knives now legal in NH
Rhode Island lawmaker files bill that follows Arizona immigration law
Gov. Charlie Crist puts off special session on oil drilling
COMMENTARY
Eric Holder Can't Read?
By L. Brent Bozell III
Liberal reporters always think that the liberal politicians they're covering are the smartest people in the room. In fact, when they're opposing something, they're so smart that they don't have to read the policy they're discussing. They have a clairvoyant sense of how wrong it is. Congressman Ted Poe of Texas exposed this liberal arrogance on May 13 at a House Judiciary Committee hearing when he asked Attorney General Eric Holder if he had read Arizona's new immigration law.
Immigration and Liberty
By Walter E. Williams
Strict enforcement of immigration law, enhanced border security, and modernizing our immigration laws are the best way to deal with a growing problem.
Fwd: Sen. DeMint (R-SC), Sec. Gates Clash Over Missile Defense During START Hearings
Sen. DeMint (R-SC), Sec. Gates Clash Over Missile Defense During First START Hearing
On Tuesday, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) clashed head on with Obama administration officials in the first hearing over a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), a proposed nuclear arms control treaty that the White House has submitted to the Senate for ratification. Senator DeMint hammered home the point that the treaty would limit how future presidents could pursue missile defenses. Secretary Gates brushed off the concerns as did the Committee Chair Senator John Kerry (D-MA) dismissing the notion that the White House has come up with anything but the perfect missile defense plan.
Missile Defense News
But others argue the White House plan is inadequate, furthermore in the future conditions and threats may change—why should the United States have to go back to Russia to get permission to defend itself. Senator Kerry has no problem seeking a permission slip from the Russians. As The New York Times reported, Senator DeMint thinks it is a terrible idea: "With his response, Senator Kerry proved why Americans have a hard time fully trusting the left to put American interests first in foreign affairs."
In fact, the administration knows the proposed treaty limits future missile defense program. That's it why it rushed to rewrite the White House fact sheet which first claimed the treaty put no limits on missile defense. The rewrite suggests that treaty won't limit Obama's plans. Even that statement is cold comfort. Obama's plan does not look like it will be adequate to deal with an Iranian threat, let alone the likes of the Russian nuclear force. Under the government's own estimate Iran could have a long-range missile, three years before it gets a missile defense umbrella up and running in Europe.
Get the FAQs on Missile Defense
In an age where conflicts are no longer confined to battlefields, missile defense is crucial. We must continue developing and improving our ability to detect, track, intercept, and destroy the enemy's missiles, whether short-, medium-, or long-range.
The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis (IFPA) has created a frequently-asked-questions guide to ballistic missile defense. Free of technical jargon, the guide helps the lay reader understand the state of our missile defense, the nature of threats around the world, and what is required for the future.
For example, some Americans wonder if missile defense is too expensive. According to the IFPA:
"Missile defense spending represents a small portion of the total U.S. defense budget: in 2010 just over $10 billion out of a total defense budget close to $700 billion. This means that missile defense comprises approximately one seventieth of what the nation is spending each year for defense. This amount pales in comparison to the devastating consequences of even a single successful nuclear missile attack against an American city. Even during the Reagan administration'sStrategic Defense Initiative emphasizing defenses against missile attacks, the fraction of the DOD budget devoted to missile defense never rose as high as 2 percent. The present investment level in defenses against missile attacks is also miniscule compared with the nearly $800 billion appropriated in the economic stimulus…It is impossible to calculate the cost of a devastating attack on one or more of our major cities that could be prevented by missile defense."
The IFPA considers its guide a "living document," updated as the need arises. Technology is constantly changing, and Americans should be aware of the importance of our current and future ballistic missile defense capabilities.
forward message visit 33minutes.com
The safety and security of our country has and will always be a top priority for all Americans. The Heritage Foundation's NationalSecurity.org provides accurate and timely information. Sign up for email updates.
The Heritage Foundation - 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC
Call us at 202-546-4400
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)