Fwd: MyHeritage.org: More Bailouts?

FEATURED VIDEO Billie Tucker, an organizer of The First Coast Tea Party, speaks at The Heritage Foundation's Resource Bank in Miami, FL. More videos » April 28, 2010 | By Amanda Reinecker More Bailouts?  Leading up to the vote on Senator Chris Dodd's 1,408 page financial reform bill, lobbyists from big labor and big finance joined forces to make sure the legislation was a Wall Street Bailout Bill. And that's exactly what it was. This is perhaps why the bill failed its first test in the Senate on Monday in a vote of 57-41. And then again on Tuesday. But the solid dissent could also be because the Congressional Budget Office found that the costs of this permanent bailout fund created in the bill would fall on the American taxpayers. In fact, there a quite a few reasons why lawmakers ought to have been skeptical of the plan. In a new Heritage Foundation publication, senior research fellow James Gattuso details 14 "fatal flaws" in Senator Dodd's regulation plan. Each of these flaws would pave the way for a bigger government with broader powers and a bleaker economic future. Among the 14 fatal flaws Gattuso points out are: Bigger Government and More Bailouts. A new federal council, the Financial Stability Oversight Council, to determine which firms are "too big to fail." Qualifying firms will only be encouraged to take on undue risk because they'll know with certainty that the government will bail them out.  Vast New Powers for the Secretary of the Treasury. The Treasury Secretary will have the power to order seizure, without meaningful judicial review, of any firm he deems "in danger of default." This seizure must be upheld if the government produces any evidence to support it. Permanent Bailout Authority. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation will have the ability to set aside funds for the liquidation of covered financial institutions. This is similar to the AIG bailout that cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. Creditors, not shareholders, would be eligible for a cash bailout. $50 Billion Bailout Fund. This "Orderly Resolution Fund" is a clear indication of future bailouts. It is funded by taxes on financial firms, a cost that, as the CBO reports, will ultimately fall on the firm's customers, employees and investors. Bailouts Not Limited to Failing Firms. Bailout authority can also apply to firms the FDIC determines are "solvent depository institutions." And the additional costs will be funded by the Treasury's newly established "line of credit" to the FDIC, which will, of course, be footed by taxpayers. Imposes One-Size-Fits-All Reform in Derivative Markets. The Senate bill would require virtually all derivative contracts, which help markets manage risk, to be settled through a clearinghouse rather than directly between the parties. This would make financial derivatives more costly, more difficult to customize, and, consequently, less widely used—which would increase overall risk in the economy. While lawmakers who support the bill consider various compromises, they should consider the points above and how they do nothing to reduce the systemic risk offered by "too big to fail" firms. These firms will continue to take risks because the federal government has promised to clean up the mess--on the taxpayers' dime. Congress should instead establish accountability by creating a modernized bankruptcy procedure for these large institutions. Heritage senior fellow David John explains that "this would ensure that regulators cannot revert to politically motivated bailouts and other forms of government intervention." The consequences of allowing the government to direct the economy are always doubtful and disastrous. Warding off a future economic crisis should not be in the hands of the government. Instead, the government's approach should be much more hands-off. > Other Heritage Work of Note "America, we've been conned," writes Heritage fellow and former Congressman Ernest Istook. Now that Obamacare is law, Americans are beginning to see it for what it is: a scam. Istook calls this a classic "bait-and-switch." One example of this sales tactic is a recent finding from government actuaries that "more Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up," as the Associated Press summarized it. Innocent people are being charged with federal crimes they never knew were crimes, Heritage fellow and former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese argues. He profiles a new Heritage publication, "One Nation Under Arrest," which cites a number of these cases. "We are making and enforcing far too many criminal laws that create traps for the innocent but unwary - and threaten to turn otherwise respectable, law-abiding citizens into criminals," he writes. Earlier this week, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law a bill that would make it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally and would allow state law enforcement to require individuals to produce proof of their citizenship. Though critics fear the bill condones racial profiling, Heritage's Jena Baker McNeil defends the bill as a "major stepping stone" toward controlling immigration at the lower levels of government. More importantly, the bill is constitutional. "The Tenth Amendment," she explains, "preserves the traditional police powers of the states to control their own jurisdictions." > In Other News Conservatives may be poised for an electoral comeback in 2010. Even staunch liberals, like Rep. David Obey, may encounter something new this election cycle: serious competition. Obey, author of the trillion-dollar "stimulus" legislation, has won 21 consecutive races.   Worried that the high-risk insurance pools created by Obamacare are woefully underfunded, many states are balking at participating in one of the first policies to be implemented under the left's new law. Texas Gov. Rick Perry reports he shot and killed a coyote during a February jog. Politico reports that President Obama and the DNC are "rallying the troops" in preparation for the 2010 elections. The President appears in a video calling "young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women who powered our victory in 2008 [to] stand together once again." Amanda Reinecker is a writer for MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation. Nathaniel Ward, the Editor of MyHeritage.org, contributed to this report.  Donate    |   Heritage on Facebook View as HTML  |   Update Your Profile   |   Unsubscribe

Fwd: Government Report Says Global Warming May Cause Cancer, Mental Illness

Today's Headlines Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Government Report Says Global Warming May Cause Cancer, Mental Illness (CNSNews.com) – A new government report says global warming could lead to an increase in both cancer and mental illness worldwide, and it calls for more federally funded research to determine how that might happen. The report was published by an inter-agency group comprised of scientists from the CDC, NIH, State Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Agriculture Department, EPA, and the Department of Health and Human Services. FEMA Saving Millions of Dollars by Turning Off Unused Cell Phones, Internet Lines (CNSNews.com) – FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate told a House subcommittee on Tuesday that his agency has ended "bad business" practices by turning off cell phones and shutting down Internet lines that have gone unused for years. Hoyer Says Arizona Immigration Enforcement Law 'Inconsistent' with Civil Liberties (CNSNews.com) - House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said that Arizona's new immigration enforcement law is "inconsistent" with American legal traditions and civil liberties. Hoyer said that such active enforcement policies should not be included in upcoming federal immigration reform. Chinese Naval Maneuvers Unsettle Its Neighbors (CNSNews.com) – A series of Chinese naval movements beyond its coastal waters this month has set off alarm bells in the region, prompting the Taiwanese military on Tuesday to hold a drill testing its response to an imaginary Chinese attack against its air bases. Japan also has watched warily as Chinese war ships passed through international waters in the southern Okinawa island chain. Ukraine's Shift on Black Sea Fleet Is A Boost for Moscow (CNSNews.com) – Russian lawmakers on Tuesday quickly approved an agreement allowing the Black Sea Fleet to use a port in Ukraine for another 25 years, sealing a deal that caused an uproar in Ukraine while marking another strategic victory for the Kremlin in the region it once dominated. CNSNEWS.COM VIDEO Actress Janine Turner: New Health Care Law Not 'A Vision' of Our Founding Fathers Washington (CNSNews.com) – Actress Janine Turner, who runs a group designed to inspire young people to study the U.S. Constitution, said that the new health care law and how it was crafted were "not based on what a true Republic represents or what our Founding Fathers would have liked." She also predicted there will be "some payback" in the November elections because of the health care law. Janine Turner: Being a Conservative in Hollywood Can Jeopardize Career (CNSNews.com) - Actress Janine Turner said conservatives in the entertainment industry are "afraid to step out," because doing so can affect their careers. At a press conference in Washington, D.C., to announce her new organization, Constituting America, CNSNews.com asked Turner if she would "elaborate a little bit more on the environment in Hollywood for conservative actors and actresses such as yourself." Sigourney Weaver: 'The Oceans Are Not Prospering' (CNSNews.com) – Because the oceans are "not prospering," people "cannot prosper," said actress Sigourney Weaver, narrator of the new documentary "Acid Test," which examines ocean acidification. OTHER CNSNEWS.COM HEADLINES   Supreme Court Says Mojave Cross Can Stay Where It Is Republicans Hope to Retake Some New England House Seats Republicans Block Financial Regulations Because of Concerns About 'Consumer Protections' China Lifts Travel Ban Against People With HIV Obama Blasts Republicans on His Latest Campaign Swing Obama Pleads for Bipartisan Immigration Reform Texas Lawmaker to Introduce Immigration Bill Like Arizona's U.S. Soldier Killed in Northern Iraq Rights Group Says Torture Is Routine in Secret Iraqi Prison PM Gordon Brown Calls Voter 'Bigoted' in UK Election Flub Nearly 2 Feet of Snow Falls in NY, New England Terrorist Attacks Spike in Pakistan, Afghanistan 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: N.J. court to rule whether hospitals may refuse life support in some cases Mentally disabled get job training on Capitol Hill Politico: 'Why reporters are down on Obama' Jeb Bush speaks out against Ariz. immigration law Need for dental care overwhelms free clinic in Los Angeles Groups raise alarm over Social Security tampering as debt panel starts work Justice Department's anti-gang units not meshing; Streets grow more violent Judge Says Univ. of Wyo. must allow Ayers' speech Ford posts $2.1B 1Q profit on strong sales Mass. clinic offers free health care to Latino immigrants COMMENTARY DOJ Intel Report Downplays Terror Threat at Border By Terence P. Jeffrey A recent report by the National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), a division of the U.S. Justice Department, downplays the threat of terrorists crossing the U.S.-Mexico border even as it paints a picture of a border wide open to the smuggling activities of Mexican drug trafficking organizations. The NDIC's National Drug Threat Assessment for 2010, released on March 25, twice appears to assert that there have been no documented cases of terrorists illegally entering the United States across the Mexican border, an assertion contradicted by a 2009 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, a 2007 statement to the El Paso Times by then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and 2005 testimony to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence by FBI Director Robert Mueller. An Open Letter to American Jews By Ben Shapiro I write to you as a charter member of the tribe. I'm not only Jewish, I'm religious, and I have one request of you: please pull your heads out of your posteriors. Your continued support for Democrats and an administration that is openly anti-Semitic is a disgrace. Your embrace of a party that seeks to hamstring Israel in the name of a wholly fictitious Middle East peace process is contemptible. Your loyalty to a president who consistently sides with Palestinian and Iranian mass murder-supporters is disgusting. How Mexico Treats Illegal Aliens By Michelle Malkin Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door "to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement." But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics." How's that for racial and ethnic profiling? And if outsiders do not enhance the country's "economic or national interests" or are "not found to be physically or mentally healthy," they are not welcome. Let's Make a Deal, Senor Presidente Calderon By Rich Galen Felipe Calderon is whining about the way we are treating immigrants in the U.S. because they may be asked to produce documents proving they are here legally, while immigrants in his very own country are being kidnapped, robbed, raped, and murdered by the tens of thousands, according to reports.

Fwd: Enterprise Update: In the Dodd Bill, “Bank” Could Mean Anyone

Enterprise Update Eliminating barriers to enterprise and innovation Recent Updates Dodd Bill Fails to Fix "Too Big Too Fail" More Revenge Than Reform Dodd's Regulation Plan: 14 Fatal Flaws Cornhusker Kickback, Part Deux Government Unions Are the Big Winners in Obama Economy The Berkshire Bailout: Congress Misunderstands Markets Featured Research In the Dodd Bill, "Bank" Could Mean Anyone By David John The Dodd financial reform bill is beginning to scare executives. However, it is not necessarily scaring bankers or Wall Street fat cats. It is scaring motor cycle manufacturers, college presidents, retailers, car dealers, and even coffee shop executives. All of these people and more are waking up to the Dodd bill's threat to their businesses. If you read the Dodd financial reform bill carefully, the words "bank" or "financial" could refer to many more people than just bankers. Those words apply to any provider of "financial products" even if the major business of the company is something completely different. On page 131, the summary of the bill's section creating a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau says that the section "makes clear that financial products or services defined in the Act that are offered or provided for use by consumers primarily for personal, family, or household purposes are considered to be "consumer financial products or services" for purposes of this Act. In addition, other key financial activities that are central to consumers are also included in this definition. >> Click here to read the full report For more information, visit Heritage's Enterprise and Free Markets webpage, which features research, commentary, blog posts, charts and additional policy resources. Red Tape Rising The regulatory burden on Americans continued to surge during 2009, with record increases in costs thanks to both the Bush and Obama Administrations. Given ongoing regulatory initiatives at several agencies, it is very likely that this surge will continue. Click here for more information About The Heritage Foundation Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institute -- a think tank -- whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Ave NE, Washington, DC 20002 | 202.546.4400

Fwd: MRC Alert: ABC and NBC Champion ‘Growing National Backlash' Against 'Laughing Stock' Arizona

 

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
Wednesday April 28, 2010 @ 09:56 AM EDT

1. ABC and NBC Champion 'Growing National Backlash' Against 'Laughing Stock' Arizona
Extending the kind of respect they never provided the Tea Party activists, ABC and NBC on Tuesday night promoted what NBC anchor Brian Williams embraced as "the growing national backlash against the state of Arizona over its tough new immigration law that says police can stop people just on the suspicion they might be there illegally." ABC's Barbara Pinto touted how "the call for an economic boycott here has caught fire on the Internet" while NBC's Andrea Mitchell trumpeted how "anger over the law has gone viral," as both pointed to how the American Immigration Lawyers Association had canceled a conference – of a mere 400 attendees - scheduled for the state. NBC's Mitchell played clips from two left-wing comedians, as she asserted: "It's now gone beyond protest to threats of a boycott, as Arizona becomes a laughing stock to some." Viewers then heard a joke from Saturday Night Live about "fascism" followed by The Daily Show's Jon Stewart: "It's not unprecedented, having to carry around your papers. It's the same thing free black people had to do in 1863." After showcasing a Facebook page ("Arizona, the Grand Canyon State, welcomes you unless you're a Mexican or look like one"), Mitchell cited "a slap in the face" from Mexico which, ironically, warned its citizens about traveling to Arizona.

2. NYT Former Reporter Greenhouse Fires on Arizona's 'Police State,' Makes Nazi Comparison
Former New York Times Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse retains her fairness and balance: "I'm glad I've already seen the Grand Canyon. Because I'm not going back to Arizona as long as it remains a police state, which is what the appalling anti-immigrant bill that Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law last week has turned it into."

3. CBS's Smith: Hispanics See Arizona Law as 'Purely Discriminatory'
Near the end of an interview with Arizona Senator John McCain on Tuesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith turned to the subject of illegal immigration and the new Arizona law to combat it: "a very tough immigration reform bill which basically makes it illegal for you to be in the state without some sort of documentation. Is this law the answer to the immigration crisis?" Smith followed up by wondering: "And for the millions of Hispanic Americans who live in Arizona, what do you say to them who feel like this bill is purely discriminatory?"

4. CBS's Smith to McCain: 'How Are You Going to Dismantle' Financial Institutions?
Hitting from the left in an interview with Republican Senator John McCain on Tuesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith worried about the ability of financial reform legislation to expand government control over Wall Street: "How are you going to dis – how does any of this dismantle these giant financial institutions?" At the top of the show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez put the GOP on the defensive: "Democrats continue to push for Wall Street reform. But are Republicans on board?"

---

 

ABC and NBC Champion 'Growing National Backlash' Against 'Laughing Stock' Arizona

 

Extending the kind of respect they never provided the Tea Party activists, ABC and NBC on Tuesday night promoted what NBC anchor Brian Williams embraced as "the growing national backlash against the state of Arizona over its tough new immigration law that says police can stop people just on the suspicion they might be there illegally."

ABC's Barbara Pinto touted how "the call for an economic boycott here has caught fire on the Internet" while NBC's Andrea Mitchell trumpeted how "anger over the law has gone viral," as both pointed to how the American Immigration Lawyers Association had canceled a conference – of a mere 400 attendees -- scheduled for the state.

NBC's Mitchell played clips from two left-wing comedians, as she asserted: "It's now gone beyond protest to threats of a boycott, as Arizona becomes a laughing stock to some." Viewers then heard a joke from Saturday Night Live about "fascism" followed by The Daily Show's Jon Stewart: "It's not unprecedented, having to carry around your papers. It's the same thing free black people had to do in 1863." After showcasing a Facebook page ("Arizona, the Grand Canyon State, welcomes you unless you're a Mexican or look like one"), Mitchell cited "a slap in the face" from Mexico which, ironically, warned its citizens about traveling to Arizona.

Mitchell gave a soundbite to Senator John McCain, but countered him with a clip from Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, before she added: "Today the Attorney General called the law 'unfortunate.'" On ABC's World News, Pinto reported "the anger over this law spread to cities like Chicago, and L.A." as "the call for an economic boycott here has caught fire on the Internet and even from an Arizona State Representative warning conventioneers to stay away."

Pinto forwarded a comparison to Arizona's failure to enact a MLK holiday and highlighted Meghan McCain's denunciation:

This has happened before. Arizona's decision two decades ago not to honor the Martin Luther King, Jr., holiday cost the state 170 conventions and a Superbowl – a grand total of $360 million – and Arizona was forced to reverse its stance. The new law has even split families. Senator John McCain has taken a hardline stance in favor of the law, but his daughter Meghan blogged her disagreement, saying, "I believe it gives the state police a license to discriminate."

Only at the very end of her piece did Pinto bother to mention: "Still, most Arizona residents – 70 percent – support this new law."

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide these transcripts of the Tuesday, April 27 stories:

ABC's World News:

DIANE SAWYER: And we move on now to the raging argument about illegal immigration in this country and the move afoot tonight to boycott the state of Arizona because of the new law on stopping anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant. Grand Canyon tours, business conventions, even the Arizona Diamondbacks baseball team are being targeted. And Barbara Pinto is in Phoenix for reaction.

BARBARA PINTO: For the first time since he opened his restaurant nine years ago, Dylan Bethke is worried.

DYLAN BETHKE: You'd take about a quarter of our business away if we lost some big conventions.

PINTO: The restaurant operates in the shadow of the Phoenix Convention Center, and in the bull's eye of the growing fury over Arizona's tough new immigration law. Today, the anger over this law spread to cities like Chicago, and L.A. Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill into law on Friday.

GOVERNOR JAN BREWER (R-AZ): I do not know what an illegal immigrant looks like.

PINTO: And police will have to try to figure that out. The new law forces them to stop and arrest anyone who appears to be illegal. The call for an economic boycott here has caught fire on the Internet and even from an Arizona State Representative warning conventioners to stay away.

STATE REP. RAUL GRIJALVA (D-AZ): The governor basically codified into state law racial profiling, violation of civil rights.

PINTO: The first to cancel their plans, 400 members of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, who will lose their $92,000 deposit.

CRYSTAL WILLIAMS, AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION: We just cannot in good conscience be in a state and be supporting the economy of a state that will do something like this to its people.

PINTO: This has happened before. Arizona's decision two decades ago not to honor the Martin Luther King, Jr., holiday cost the state 170 conventions and a Superbowl – a grand total of $360 million – and Arizona was forced to reverse its stance. The new law has even split families. Senator John McCain has taken a hardline stance in favor of the law, but his daughter Meghan blogged her disagreement, saying, "I believe it gives the state police a license to discriminate." Still, most Arizona residents – 70 percent – support this new law. Their fears about crime seem to outweigh any worries about the economy. Barbara Pinto, ABC News, Phoenix.

SAWYER: And we'd like to know what you think about the boycott, so weigh in on the debate at our Web site, ABCNews.com.

NBC Nightly News:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Now to the growing national backlash against the state of Arizona over its tough new immigration law that says police can stop people just on the suspicion they might be there illegally. NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports on the movement to punish Arizona now by hurting the state's economy.

ANDREA MITCHELL: It's now gone beyond protest to threats of a boycott, as Arizona becomes a laughing stock to some.

SETH MYERS ON SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, CLIP #1: Can we all agree that there's nothing more Nazi than saying, "Show me your papers"? There's never been a World War II movie that didn't include the line, "Show me your papers." It's their catch phrase.

MYERS CLIP #2: So heads up, Arizona. That's fascism. I know, I know, it's a dry fascism, but it's still fascism.

JON STEWART, THE DAILY SHOW: That's tough. It's not unprecedented, having to carry around your papers. It's the same thing free black people had to do in 1863.

MITCHELL: 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.

BEN BETHEL, PHOENIX HOTEL OWNER: I really feel that this is one of the biggest anti-business things that the state could have done.

MITCHELL: From across the border, a slap in the face. Mexico's government issued an official travel warning that their citizens "could be bothered and questioned without much cause at any time in Arizona." Mexico's President said the Arizona law could hurt relations with the U.S. Still, the law is wildly popular with many Arizonans, especially Republicans in tough races.

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ): The people in southern Arizona have had their rights violated by the unending and constant flow of drug smugglers and human traffickers across their property.

MITCHELL: Homeland Security Secretary and former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano:

JANET NAPOLITANO, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: It will detract from some of the efforts that are already under way to really focus on the most serious offenders, the most serious criminals, the ones that not only have crossed the border illegally, but are committing other crimes.
                            
MITCHELL: Today the Attorney General called the law "unfortunate." And tonight, Justice Department lawyers are still deciding whether to challenge it in court. Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington.

— Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

NYT Former Reporter Greenhouse Fires on Arizona's 'Police State,' Makes Nazi Comparison

 

Linda Greenhouse, the New York Times former Supreme Court reporter, now writes a twice-monthly column for nytimes.com. But the paper's editors must have found her latest rant on Arizona's tough new immigration law particularly powerful, because it made it into Tuesday's print edition: "Breathing While Undocumented."

Greenhouse, who caused controversy while still a Times reporter when she made her hard-left views on abortion and Guantanamo Bay public at a Harvard commencement address in the summer of 2006, really let it out on Tuesday, with visions of police states and a seemingly inevitable comparison to Nazism.

I'm glad I've already seen the Grand Canyon.

Because I'm not going back to Arizona as long as it remains a police state, which is what the appalling anti-immigrant bill that Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law last week has turned it into.

What would Arizona's revered libertarian icon, Barry Goldwater, say about a law that requires the police to demand proof of legal residency from any person with whom they have made "any lawful contact" and about whom they have "reasonable suspicion" that "the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States?" Wasn't the system of internal passports one of the most distasteful features of life in the Soviet Union and apartheid-era South Africa?

Greenhouse summarized the recent history of "anti-immigrant spasms" and recommended the federal government get involved in Arizona:

Indeed, federal pre-emption would appear to be the most promising route for attacking the Arizona law. Supreme Court precedents make clear that immigration is a federal matter and that the Constitution does not authorize the states to conduct their own foreign policies.

My confidence about the law's fate in the court's hands is not boundless, however. In 1982, hours after the court decided the Texas case, a young assistant to Attorney General William French Smith analyzed the decision and complained in a memo: "This is a case in which our supposed litigation program to encourage judicial restraint did not get off the ground, and should have." That memo's author was John G. Roberts Jr.

After introducing the "police state" idea at the beginning, Greenhouse fires that weapon in the third act of her column, bringing up the Nazis:

So what to do in the meantime? Here's a modest proposal. Everyone remembers the wartime Danish king who drove through Copenhagen wearing a Star of David in support of his Jewish subjects. It's an apocryphal story, actually, but an inspiring one. Let the good people of Arizona -- and anyone passing through -- walk the streets of Tucson and Phoenix wearing buttons that say: I Could Be Illegal.

You can follow Times Watch on Twitter.

CBS's Smith: Hispanics See Arizona Law as 'Purely Discriminatory'

 

Near the end of an interview with Arizona Senator John McCain on Tuesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith turned to the subject of illegal immigration and the new Arizona law to combat it: "a very tough immigration reform bill which basically makes it illegal for you to be in the state without some sort of documentation. Is this law the answer to the immigration crisis?"

McCain noted the number of illegal immigrants entering Arizona and the level of drug trafficking taking place: "Across the Tucson sector of Arizona last year, there was 241,000 apprehensions of illegal immigrants....1.3 million pounds of marijuana intercepted on the Tucson border just last year." Smith followed up by wondering: "And for the millions of Hispanic Americans who live in Arizona, what do you say to them who feel like this bill is purely discriminatory?"

In a news brief on the topic at the top of the 8AM ET hour, fill-in news reader Betty Nguyen described how: "The Obama administration and activists are considering legal challenges to Arizona's new immigration enforcement law, which has reignited a national debate." A series of signs from an immigration protest in San Francisco appeared on screen: "Latinos Today, Who's Next? Shame on Arizona;" "Boycott Arizona;" "Brown Is Not A Crime."As footage of the protest rolled, Nguyen explained: "The law makes it a crime to be an illegal immigrant." On Monday, an MSNBC headline made the same odd statement.

On Monday's CBS Evening News, correspondent John Blackstone argued: "many feel the sting of racism in the new law."

The Saturday Early Show also covered the passage of the Arizona immigration law, as co-host Chris Wragge declared at the show's opening: "Border War. Arizona's governor signs the nation's toughest law against illegal immigration. Will the new legislation help secure the nation's borders or expand racial profiling?"

Moments later, White House correspondent Bill Plante reported: "The bill makes it a crime to be in Arizona illegally....Brewer said that she would not tolerate racial profiling, but that's what federal officials fear. President Obama called the Arizona law 'misguided' and urged lawmakers to get going on immigration reform. 'Failure to act,' he said, 'opens the door to irresponsibility.'" A headline on screen read: "Arizona Crackdown; New Law Makes Illegal Immigration A Crime" Apparently neither MSNBC nor CBS seem capable of seeing the irony in that declaration.

Following Plante's report, Wragge moderated a debate on the issue between Republican strategist Bay Buchanan and Democratic strategist Maria Cardona. Wragge wondered: "Does Arizona's new immigration law go too far?" He then asked Buchanan: "Do you find it in any way unconstitutional?"

Turning to Cardona, Wragge continued his negative tone: "Why is this bad for the people of Arizona, in your eyes?" That gave Cardona the opportunity to rant: "It is not only horrendous policy, it is even worse politics. This is an insidious law that will actually make, not just all undocumented immigrants, but all legal and U.S. citizen Latinos, many of which, whose families have been in Arizona even before Arizona was part of the United States. It makes them under suspicion."

Following up, Wragge did challenge Cardona to present an alternative solution to the immigration problem: "$3 billion a year to educate, medicate, and incarcerate illegals in the state of Arizona. You're not in favor of this law, so what could have been done differently?" Cardona called for a "comprehensive" federal approach and again attacked the Arizona law: "The only thing this law will do is to make it open season for any immigrant, anybody who does not look Anglo, and it will make actually racial profiling legal in Arizona. It's insidious and it's wrongheaded."

Here is a full transcript of Wragge's discussion with Buchanan and Cardona:

CHRIS WRAGGE: So, does Arizona's new immigration law go too far? Let's get two points of view this morning. Bay Buchanan is a Republican strategist, who supports the measure. Maria Cardona is a Democratic strategist, opposed to it. Both are in our Washington bureau this morning. Ladies, good morning to the both of you. BAY BUCHANAN: Good morning to you.

MARIA CARDONA: Good morning.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: The Great Immigration Debate; Does Arizona's New Law Go Too Far?]

WRAGGE: Bay, I'm going to start with you. I know you fully support this bill, but do you-

BUCHANAN: Absolutely.

WRAGGE: -do you find it in any way unconstitutional?

BUCHANAN: Oh not – not whatsoever. You know what they're giving is the tools to the law enforcement officers of Arizona. The same tools that we now have given to the border agents. They have the ability to ask people about their legal status. And the key was what Russell Pearce, the Senator who's behind this bill, did. See he went to the police officers and the law enforcement officers, the prosecutors in Arizona and said, 'what can we do? What do you need to finally take care of this issue here in the state?' And they said, 'we need greater tools, we need these abilities,' and that's what they did, is they have now put it into law, given the law enforcement officers of Arizona the ability to secure the welfare and the safety of the people of Arizona.

WRAGGE: Lots of responsibility for local law enforcement in Arizona. Maria, why is this bad for the people of Arizona, in your eyes?

CARDONA: It is not only horrendous policy, it is even worse politics. This is an insidious law that will actually make, not just all undocumented immigrants, but all legal and U.S. citizen Latinos, many of which, whose families have been in Arizona even before Arizona was part of the United States. It makes them under suspicion. They become people of interest under this law. They could be speaking Spanish on a corner. Who knows what 'reasonable suspicion' means. The Governor herself could not answer the question yesterday about what an illegal immigrant looks like. So, law enforcement officers, a lot of – a lot of law enforcement officers in Arizona don't want this law. They understand that they need community policing and in order to be effective law enforcement officers, they need the trust of the Hispanic community, which will absolutely evaporate under this law.

BUCHANAN: But-

WRAGGE: Yeah, go ahead, Bay.

BUCHANAN: But you know, Chris, the law, as it stands before this was written, has not done the job. Arizona is a target for human and drug smuggling. It's the number one place, the number one state in the country where that's coming through, that's the target of the drug cartels to take them right through that state. And, as a result, Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the country and it's one of the top kidnapping capitals of the world now.

CARDONA: But, the-

BUCHANAN: The crime in Arizona is outrageous. People are being murdered, the crime is high. The schools are overloaded. This – laws have not worked and so now they're given the tools. They're taking the handcuffs off the police officers and they're going to be putting them on those who are violating the laws of this country.

WRAGGE: Alright. Maria, let me ask you this. $3 billion a year along the lines of what Bay is saying here, $3 billion a year to educate, medicate, and incarcerate illegals in the state of Arizona. You're not in favor of this law, so what could have been done differently?

CARDONA: Look, what we need, clearly, is comprehensive immigration reform. I absolutely understand the frustration of the folks in Arizona, of all of our leaders in the border states who – who look at this problem and have – and have had this problem for many, many, many years. It is an issue that we need to deal with at a federal level, which is why the President said yesterday that we need to deal with this by passing comprehensive immigration reform.

The law in Arizona is not the way to go. I agree with Bay that there is a huge problem with undocumented immigrants who are actually drug traffickers and – and all of the crime is clearly an issue. This law does nothing to address this. The only thing this law will do is to make it open season for any immigrant, anybody who does not look Anglo, and it will make actually racial profiling legal in Arizona.

WRAGGE: Bay, last word to you, Bay-

CARDONA: It's insidious and it's wrongheaded.

WRAGGE: Bay, last word to you. How do you apply this law without racially discriminating against people or profiling?

BUCHANAN: You know, our border agents do it every day. So, this is nothing new. And, so-

CARDONA: They are trained.

BUCHANAN: -what they're saying is – they are trained – and that is what the governor of Arizona said, she's going to train her police officers. The key here is this is what the people of Arizona want. They've had it with federal government. They have refused to do the job, and the answer is not amnesty for the 15 to 20 million illegals here. That's what Obama wants. That's what the Democrats want. It is not – that just increases the number of people coming into the country illegal. The people of Arizona on the front lines that are paying the price, they've had it. This will clean up the problem in Arizona. That's what it'll do.

WRAGGE: Ladies, I got to leave it there.

CARDONA: It'll do nothing to do that.

WRAGGE: Got to leave it there. Thank you both very much. We could probably spend the next two hours on this topic.

BUCHANAN: We could.

WRAGGE: It is a hot topic. Alright. Republican strategist Bay Buchanan, Democratic strategist Maria Cardona. Thank you both, ladies, we do appreciate you getting up early with us this morning.

BUCHANAN: Sure, thank you.

CARDONA: Thank you very much.

—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.

CBS's Smith to McCain: 'How Are You Going to Dismantle' Financial Institutions?

 

Hitting from the left in an interview with Republican Senator John McCain on Tuesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith worried about the ability of financial reform legislation to expand government control over Wall Street: "How are you going to dis – how does any of this dismantle these giant financial institutions?"

On April 22, ABC Good Morning America co-host George Stephanopoulos asked Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner a similar question: "Why shouldn't those big banks be broken up?"  

At the top of Tuesday's Early Show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez put the GOP on the defensive: "Democrats continue to push for Wall Street reform. But are Republicans on board?" Smith later introduced the segment by portraying Democrats as fighting for reform: "Democrats refuse to give up on reforming Wall Street. Yesterday Republicans put the brakes on, but another vote could happen today."

In a report that followed, correspondent Nancy Cordes declared: "Senate Republicans voted last night against moving forward with debate on the massive financial reform bill. That drew angry recriminations from Democrats." A clip was played of Democratic Virginia Senator Mark Warner slamming Republican opposition: "I never got the memo that said our job wasn't actually to get stuff done."

Smith asked McCain about the bill's effectiveness in preventing another financial crisis: "will Americans be immune from the same kind of cataclysm that almost took the country off the economic edge two years ago?" McCain responded by pointing out problems with the legislation: "The bill, as it's constituted, I certainly couldn't give that guarantee....Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not included in any way in this legislation. They were the major catalyst behind this meltdown."

Smith went on to fret: "these giant financial institutions make most of their money now, not by mergers and acquisitions, not by investment banking, but by trading. They don't want to get out of the trading business. How are you going to dis – how does any of this dismantle these giant financial institutions?"

Here is a full transcript of the segment:

7:00AM TEASE

MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Goldman Sachs executives get grilled on Capitol Hill today as Democrats continue to push for Wall Street reform. But are Republicans on board? We'll talk exclusively with Senator John McCain.

7:01AM SEGMENT

HARRY SMITH: First, Democrats refuse to give up on reforming Wall Street. Yesterday Republicans put the brakes on, but another vote could happen today. And in the hot seat this morning, the embattled head of Goldman Sachs. CBS News congressional correspondent Nancy Cordes has more from Capitol Hill. Nancy, good morning.

NANCY CORDES: Good morning, Harry. This is the first time that the CEO of Goldman Sachs will testify here on Capitol Hill since his company was accused of fraud. Now, the Senators have been conducting their own investigation here. They say the company was making huge bets against the mortgage market, hastening its decline. According to his prepared testimony, Lloyd Blankfein, the embattled CEO of investment banking giant Goldman Sachs, will tell senators today, quote, 'we certainly did not bet against our clients.'

CARL LEVIN: I don't think they've been forthcoming with the public.

CORDES: The Securities and Exchange Commission has accused Goldman of knowingly deceiving clients, not telling them that one of its mortgage related investments called 'Abacus' was designed to fail. Internal company e-mails just released by congressional investigators suggest Goldman was having trouble finding an outside manager to vouch for Abacus, with one trader writing that one manager, quote, 'declined given their negative views on most of the credits. Senator Carl Levin of Michigan will lead the questioning today. What is it that your investigation has uncovered that has troubled you the most?

LEVIN: I think what troubles me, probably the most, is the conflicts of interest which are fundamentally inherent.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: The motion is not agreed to.

CORDES: Meanwhile, Senate Republicans voted last night against moving forward with debate on the massive financial reform bill. That drew angry recriminations from Democrats.

MARK WARNER: I never got the memo that said our job wasn't actually to get stuff done.

CORDES: Republicans say they want to get stuff done, too. They just have problems with the bill, the two sides are still at the bargaining table. They say those talks are going well and the Democrats could schedule another vote in the next few days. Harry.

SMITH: Nancy Cordes on Capitol Hill this morning. Thank you very much. Joining us exclusively from Washington is Arizona senator and former Republican presidential nominee John McCain. Senator, good morning.

JOHN MCCAIN: Good morning, Harry.

SMITH: Finance reform bill. Dead, alive, comatose, how would you describe it?

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Financial Reform; McCain, GOP Take on Obama Plan]

MCCAIN: I'd say alive. I think that there's been significant progress made. I think there's more progress that needs to be made. There's a lot of complexities here, a lot of members frankly don't understand all aspects of the bill. But I think there is a common desire to achieve a goal here.

SMITH: In the end, will Americans – if this gets passed – in the end, will Americans be immune from the same kind of cataclysm that almost took the country off the economic edge two years ago?

MCCAIN: The bill, as it's constituted, I certainly couldn't give that guarantee. For example, Fannie and Freddie are not – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not included in any way in this legislation. They were the major catalyst behind this meltdown.

SMITH: The big mortgage lenders, yeah.

MCCAIN: Exactly. I'm very worried about the fact that these – if financial institutions that are big have gotten bigger. So there's a lot of concern here. But I think there is a good faith effort being made to reach an agreement.

SMITH: One of the things that was talked about was this whole notion of 'too big to fail,' these giant financial institutions make most of their money now, not by mergers and acquisitions, not by investment banking, but by trading. They don't want to get out of the trading business. How are you going to dis – how does any of this dismantle these giant financial institutions?

MCCAIN: Well, I think that there are regulations over so-called derivatives and there's other measures. But what bothers me is that why not – don't we just, as I, Senator Cantwell and I recommended, just go back to the point where banks that do the traditional banking things, making loans to people so they can buy their homes and all of that, just make them separate from these financial institutions. As we'll find out today in the hearing with Mr. Blankfein, that they do a lot of other things. In fact, there is compelling evidence, as was just reported, that the kind of activity that Goldman was in hastened the – and deepened the crisis.

SMITH: Yeah. Do you feel like – or from what you understand of it anyway – that Goldman Sachs was literally betting against itself?

MCCAIN: I don't think they were betting against themselves. I think they were trying to hedge their bets the same way if you go to it Las Vegas, the sports book, and the sports book balances the bets. But it had the effect of worsening and deepening the housing crisis, in my view.

—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.

Fwd: Morning Bell: The Senate's Goldman Kabuki

04/28/2010 The Senate's Goldman Kabuki The New York Times reports this morning, "Politicians like nothing more than a convenient foil, and Democrats locked in a stubborn impasse with Republicans over new rules to govern Wall Street believe they have found a gold-plated one in Goldman Sachs. Democrats say the convergence of their push for an overhaul of financial regulation and a prominent federal securities case against the prestigious investment firm is a matter of coincidence, not planning." Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) added: "If the disclosures at these hearings are not the final nail that persuades the American people to demand this be done now, I don't know what would be." But the big problem for the leftist majorities in Congress is that the American people just don't believe that Washington has any idea about why the financial crisis happened or how to regulate our financial system. According to Rasmussen Reports, 64% of Americans are not confident that policymakers in Washington know what they're doing when addressing the current economic problems on Wall Street. Intent on proving his ignorance of how finance works, Dorgan went on to say: "To bet against your clients, to bet against your country, all for the sake of big profits. The timing is serendipitous but it should increase the pressure on Republicans." Is Dorgan for real? Does he really believe that anyone who did not blindly keep inflating the housing bubble was "betting against your country"? Is it now unpatriotic to believe that housing prices cannot infinitely rise?

Fwd: It’s Official -- Higher Health Care Costs

April 27, 2010 It's Official -- Higher Health Care Costs Recently, the actuaries at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the agency that runs the giant entitlement programs, released its analysis of the new health care law. The AP reports that "White House officials have repeatedly complained that such analyses have been too pessimistic and lowball the law's potential to achieve savings," but the official CMS analysis reinforces several of Heritage's predictions regarding Obamacare. Some highlights of the CMS report: -- Mandates Without Impact. Writes CMS, "For many individuals, the penalty amounts for not having insurance coverage were not sufficiently large to have a sizable impact on the coverage decision" (p. 7). Concerning employers, "the penalties would not be a substantial deterrent to dropping or forgoing coverage" (p. 7). So these provisions will do little to achieve their purpose (i.e., to encourage individuals to carry coverage and employers to offer it). -- If You Like it, You May Still Lose It: CMS reports that about 14 million Americans will end up losing their current employer-sponsored coverage. Though many will instead receive coverage in the exchange, this shows that instead of encouraging employers to offer coverage, new law creates incentives to dump the responsibility of their employees' health care onto taxpayers. -- Increase Medicare Solvency? Don't [Double] Count on It. Estimated savings for Medicare Part A would be substantial enough to extend the program's solvency to 2029 — under prior law, funds would be exhausted by 2017. However, CMS writes, "In practice, the improved HI financing cannot be simultaneously used to finance other Federal outlays (such as the coverage expansions) and to extend the trust fund…" (p. 9). Savings from Medicare will fund newly created programs — not reduce the program's future unfunded liabilities. -- Medicare Savings (If They Occur) Mean Bad News for Seniors. Medicare hospital payments will grow at a slower rate than the cost of providing services, such that "… providers for whom Medicare constitutes a substantive portion of their business could find it difficult to remain profitable and, absent legislative intervention [think "doc fix"], might end their participation in the program (possibly jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries)" (p. 10). As far as changes for Medicare Advantage enrollees, CMS reports that "new provisions will generally reduce MA rebates to plans and thereby result in less generous benefit packages … in 2017 … enrollment in MA plans will be lower by about 50 percent …" (p. 11). -- New Federal Programs Born to Be Bailed Out. The CLASS Program will offer long-term care insurance, but enrollees will pay premiums (which are, by the way, counted as an offset to the overall cost of the bill) for five years before benefits are attainable. This program is doomed from the get-go: CMS reports that "… voluntary, unsubsidized, and non-underwritten insurance programs such as CLASS face a significant risk of failure as a result of adverse selection by participants … there is a very serious risk that the problem of adverse selection will make the CLASS program unsustainable" (p. 15). -- Bending the Spending Curve UP? CMS reports that under new law, overall national health expenditures will increase by $311 billion. This is the net result of increases in coverage and decreased spending from reductions to Medicare and due to the excise tax on Cadillac insurance plans. Expect this figure to rise if Congress indefinitely postpones unsustainable Medicare cuts (again, think "doc fix") and yields to political pressure to ax the Cadillac tax, both of which will likely happen. Comparative Effectiveness may have a small effect on reducing the growth of health care costs, but, writes CMS, "We show a negligible financial impact over the next 10 years for the other provisions intended to help control future health care cost growth" (p. 13). Bottom Line: A health care law that will be costly to taxpayers, burden businesses, and create more problems than it solves. Follow the side effects of Obamacare here. RECENT ENTRIES Congress Regulates Themselves Out of Coverage The Catch 22 of Obamacare Risk Pools IRS Could Eat Your Refund Pew Poll: Government Is Not the Solution  Share Today's Side Effects Facebook Myspace Digg Linkdin Twitter   Facebook Twitter YouTube Kindle Flickr Support our work by becoming a member with your gift of $25 or more. The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002-4999 Call us at (202) 546-4400 Add morningbell@heritage.org to your address book to ensure that you receive emails from us.

Fwd: MRC Alert: CBS Again Focuses on Victims in Arizona: 'Many Feel the Sting of Racism in New Law'

 

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
Tuesday April 27, 2010 @ 08:58 AM EDT

1. CBS Again Focuses on Victims in Arizona: 'Many Feel the Sting of Racism in New Law'
For the second consecutive weeknight, the CBS Evening News on Monday framed Arizona's new anti-illegal immigrant bill around the fears and charges of its supposed victims. With "ANGER & ANXIETY" on screen below video of signs hostile to the new law ("LAND OF THE FREE! REALLY?" and a Swastika sign with "Achtung! Papers Please"), Katie Couric teased: "Anger in Arizona against a new law allowing police to make you prove you're in the country legally" – followed by a man who impugned supporters: "They're just focusing on us because we're brown." Couric soon set up CBS's story by relaying how "opponents say it will lead to racial profiling." John Blackstone presented arguments in favor of the law, but delivered his story through the eyes of sympathetic, if misinformed, people who see themselves as victims.

2. Lauer Confronts AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Will Tough Immigration Law Affect 'Image of Your State?'
NBC's Matt Lauer, on Monday's Today show, confronted Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio with a cartoon that depicted a man being arrested for buying nachos, as the Today co-anchor pressed Arpaio about that state's enforcement of illegal immigration laws: "Are you worried that it affects the image of your state?" Throughout the interview Lauer peppered the sheriff with questions about "racial profiling" and "civil rights violations" and questioned if the new policy will "distract law enforcement" and "take valuable resources away from cracking down on more serious crimes."

3. ABC's Bill Weir to Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Will You 'Grab People on Street Corners?'
ABC's weekend coverage of a tough immigration bill in Arizona focused mostly on the anger and outrage against it, minimizing supporters of the legislation. Talking to Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a fierce critic of illegals, Good Morning America co-host Bill Weir on Sunday berated, "But with this new law, will you ramp it up?...Will you grab people on street corners? I mean, what will you do with this new law?"

4. ABC: 'Mostly Peaceful' Immigration Protests vs. 'Very Ugly' Tea Party Rallies
On Saturday's Good Morning America, reporter Mike Von Fremd downplayed the violence of protesters against Arizona's new immigration law. He spun, "Riot police were called in to try and control demonstrators protesting outside the capital. Most were peaceful. A handful threw bottles at police and were arrested." Yet, ABC derided March's Tea Party rallies as "very ugly."

5. 'Mostly Peacefully' Means 'Somewhat Violently' at the New York Times
NYT reporter Randal Archibold describes a demonstration involving advocates for illegal immigrants: "As hundreds of demonstrators massed, mostly peacefully, at the capitol plaza..." There were actually three arrests at the rally, two for assaults on police, and video clips show chaos and water bottles flying through the air. Can you imagine the coverage if this had been a Tea Party rally?

6. MSNBC News Flash: Arizona Law 'Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant'
During the Monday 12PM ET hour of live coverage on MSNBC, anchor Contessa Brewer described the "firestorm" over a newly passed immigration law in Arizona and fretted: "does this lead to a situation where neighbors are turning in neighbors or families turning against families?" Later in the segment, a headline on screen read: "Law Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant." Brewer later quoted current Homeland Security Secretary and former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano: "she would veto these kinds of bills because she said – she thought it was important for police to be doing actual police work, that they are not immigration enforcement officers."

7. Matthews Urges James Cameron to Trash 'Dangerous' Global Warming Deniers in 'Right Wing Media'
Chris Matthews spent an entire segment of Monday's Hardball sucking up to director James Cameron as the MSNBC host prodded the "Avatar" director to trash those in the "right wing media" who deny global warming, like Glenn Beck, as "very dangerous to this country." Cameron, who was on to plug the DVD version (coming soon to a landfill near you) of his pro-greenie fantasy flick, warned the Earth was being imperiled by not only the United States but also a rising middle class in places like India and China, and urged viewers to combat the "professional deniers" like Beck who are thwarting his fight against the "clear and present danger" of climate change.

8. CBS's Smith: 'Will Anyone in GOP Break Ranks' on Financial Reform?
t the top of Monday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith referenced a possible Senate vote on the Democrats' financial reform bill and proclaimed: "Showdown in the Senate. Democrats are scrambling to get enough votes. Will anyone in the GOP break ranks?" It was just the latest example of a week of CBS coverage pressuring Republicans to sign on to the controversial legislation. n a later report, correspondent Nancy Cordes explained: "both parties say they are for reform and they are deep in negotiations over it....But without a deal, many, if not all, Senate Republicans plan to vote 'no' today, blocking a floor debate on the bill." A headline on screen read: "Financial Reform Showdown; Will Anyone in GOP Break Ranks?"

---

 

CBS Again Focuses on Victims in Arizona: 'Many Feel the Sting of Racism in New Law'

 

For the second consecutive weeknight, the CBS Evening News on Monday framed Arizona's new anti-illegal immigrant bill around the fears and charges of its supposed victims. With "ANGER & ANXIETY" on screen below video of signs hostile to the new law ("LAND OF THE FREE! REALLY?" and a Swastika sign with "Achtung! Papers Please"), Katie Couric teased: "Anger in Arizona against a new law allowing police to make you prove you're in the country legally" – followed by a man who impugned supporters: "They're just focusing on us because we're brown."

Couric soon set up CBS's story by relaying how "opponents say it will lead to racial profiling" as she didn't pass judgment on their vandalism when she reported "some of those opponents vandalized the state capitol building, smearing re-fried beans in the shape of swastikas on the windows." (Talk about fulfilling a stereotype)

John Blackstone presented arguments in favor of the law, but delivered his story through the eyes of sympathetic, if misinformed, people who see themselves as victims. "Kym Rivera brought her children to a demonstration today against Arizona's new immigration law. Her husband, born in El Salvador was sworn in as a citizen last October," but "she fears he'll become a suspect when police are searching for illegal immigrants under the new law." She baselessly asserted: "He worries he'll be asked to leave this country because he was not born here. That he'll be separated from his children, from his wife of 15 years."

Blackstoned moved on to "19-year-old Junior Perez," the same guy in the opening tease, who "has heard the assurances that the law is aimed only at illegal immigrants. He's not convinced," and, corroborating his fear, Blackstone insisted that "in a state where more than 30 percent of the population is Hispanic, many feel the sting of racism in the new law." Perez charged: "They're just focusing on us because we're brown. So, it's just devastating."

My BiasAlert item on Friday's CBS newscast, "CBS Frames Arizona's Anti-Illegal Alien Law Through Eyes of Opponents: 'Veto Racism,'" recounted:

Arizona's new law hardly earned a friendly reception Friday night from any of the network newscasts, but CBS went the furthest in presenting it from the perspective of its "victims" as anchor Katie Couric, over video of "Veto Racism" and "Stop the Hate" signs, teased: "Tonight, Arizona's controversial new immigration law. Police will now be able to make anyone they choose prove they're here illegally. It triggers demonstrations by both sides and a warning from President Obama." (Presumably, she meant "prove they're here legally.")

Reporter Bill Whitaker suddenly found wisdom in the Catholic Church, plastering "mean-spirited" on screen: "In Los Angeles, Cardinal Roger Mahony, head of the country's largest Catholic archdiocese, called the law 'mean-spirited' and compared it to Nazi repression. Today at a ceremony for new citizens, President Obama criticized Arizona's actions."

From the Monday, April 26 CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: Turning now to Arizona's controversial new immigration law which empowers the police to stop and ask anyone for documents to prove they're in the country legally. Opponents say it will lead to racial profiling. Today, some of those opponents vandalized the state capitol building, smearing re-fried beans in the shape of swastikas on the windows. From Phoenix, here's John Blackstone.

JOHN BLACKSTONE: Kym Rivera brought her children to a demonstration today against Arizona's new immigration law. Her husband, born in El Salvador was sworn in as a citizen last October.

RIVERA: He became a citizen of the United States. That's their dream.

BLACKSTONE: But she fears he'll become a suspect when police are searching for illegal immigrants under the new law.

RIVERA: He worries he'll be asked to leave this country because he was not born here. That he'll be separated from his children, from his wife of 15 years. Why should my husband worry?

BLACKSTONE: He shouldn't worry, says Steve Montenegro, himself an immigrant from El Salvador and now a member of the state legislature. Montenegro voted for the controversial immigration law which he says opponents are distorting.

STATE REP STEVE MONTENEGRO: That it that it is a race issue, an anti-Hispanic and anti-immigrant bill and that couldn't be farther from the truth.

BLACKSTONE: What the bill does, he says, is give police another tool to fight crime that comes with the flood across the border.

MONTENEGRO: It's going crazy here and the federal government has time and again failed tremendously to protect itself citizens and secure the border.

BLACKSTONE: Arizona Senator John McCain echoed that when he responded to criticism of the state law in Washington.

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN ON SENATE FLOOR: If you don't like the bill, the legislation that the legislature passed and the governor signed in Arizona, then carry out the federal responsibilities which are to secure the border.

BLACKSTONE: 19-year-old Junior Perez has heard the assurances that the law is aimed only at illegal immigrants. He's not convinced.

JUNIOR PEREZ: If I'm a citizen or not, I'm always going to be Mexican.

BLACKSTONE: He is a citizen, born in Arizona. His parents legal immigrants from Mexico. In a state where more than 30 percent of the population is Hispanic, many feel the sting of racism in the new law.

PEREZ: They're just focusing on us because we're brown. So, it's just devastating.

BLACKSTONE: While opponents of the law promise to continue demonstrating, the battle moves into the court. Legal challenges will be based under the argument that under the Constitution only the federal government has the right to control immigration. John Blackstone, CBS News, Phoenix.

CBSNews.com online version of this story.

— Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

Lauer Confronts AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Will Tough Immigration Law Affect 'Image of Your State?'

 

View the Video Here

NBC's Matt Lauer, on Monday's Today show, confronted Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio with a cartoon that depicted a man being arrested for buying nachos, as the Today co-anchor pressed Arpaio about that state's enforcement of illegal immigration laws: "Are you worried that it affects the image of your state?" Throughout the interview Lauer peppered the sheriff with questions about "racial profiling" and "civil rights violations" and questioned if the new policy will "distract law enforcement" and "take valuable resources away from cracking down on more serious crimes." [audio available here]

The following is a complete transcript of the segment at it was aired on the April 26 Today show:

MATT LAUER: Now to that controversial new law in Arizona that allows police to demand to see documentation from anyone they suspect to be in this country illegally. It's the toughest anti-immigration law ever. Thousands of protesters took to the streets in Phoenix on Sunday, arguing it amounts to racial profiling. And they called on President Obama to help overturn it. Joe Arpaio is the sheriff in Maricopa County, Arizona. He is known as America's toughest sheriff for his crackdowns on illegal immigration and petty crime. Sheriff Arpaio, it's good to see you. Good morning.

[On screen headline: "Border Patrol, Is Arizona Immigration Law Too Tough?"]

SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO: Thank you.

LAUER: Let, let me give you the results of a recent poll. 70 percent of those people asked said they are in favor of the tough new immigration bill but, get this, 53 percent of those same people said they worry that it could lead to civil rights violations. Are they worrying for nothing?

ARPAIO: Yeah. You know, 60 days into the Obama administration, he sent his Justice Department down to the Phoenix area to investigate me for alleged racial profiling. It's been a year-and-a-half and nothing has happened. So, we know how to enforce the illegal immigration laws without racial profiling. 

LAUER: Well you know, but this law does demand, in some cases, that law enforcement officials do everything within their power to determine if someone is in this country illegally. Why won't that result in, in law enforcement officials walking up to people on the street, questioning them simply because of their appearance, because they appear to be Hispanic? 

ARPAIO: Well, first of all, that's not going to happen. I know they, pursuant to their duties. They're not gonna go on a street corner and grab people because they look like they're from another country. We haven't been doing that for the past three years, and I know law enforcement officers will not do that. That's hype. Those are the critics. Some politicians use that as an excuse because they don't like law enforcement enforcing illegal immigration laws.

LAUER: Is it going to distract law enforcement, though, and take valuable resources away from cracking down on more serious crimes?

APRAIO: Well you know, we have a lot of 8,000 to 10,000 in jail. People booked into our jails. 50 percent are misdemeanors. So that's another fallacy where law enforcement and some politicians say that's going to affect their operations, they only go after violent criminals. Law enforcement goes after everybody that violates the law, or they should.

LAUER: Critics are having a field day with this, Sheriff Arpaio, as you know. Some are calling for a business boycott of the state of Arizona. The Homeland Security Secretary, used to be the governor of Arizona, says she doesn't like this, this bill. Editorial cartoons are making fun of it. Here's one where a guy goes up to a fast food counter and orders nachos and is immediately surrounded by police for probable cause. Are you worried that it affects the image of your state?

ARPAIO: No. I think more people will move here since when we raid private businesses and arrest illegal aliens working there with the majority with phony identification, we're making more job openings by getting rid of those that are here illegally and maybe people here that are legal will be able to find a job. We do have an economic problem across our nation, including the Phoenix area.

LAUER: Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Sheriff Arpaio thank you for joining us this morning. I appreciate it.

ARPAIO: Thank you.

—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.

ABC's Bill Weir to Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Will You 'Grab People on Street Corners?'

 

View the Video Here

ABC's weekend coverage of a tough immigration bill in Arizona focused mostly on the anger and outrage against it, minimizing supporters of the legislation. Talking to Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a fierce critic of illegals, Good Morning America co-host Bill Weir on Sunday berated, "But with this new law, will you ramp it up?...Will you grab people on street corners? I mean, what will you do with this new law?" [Audio available here.]

He also challenged Arpaio about his own fight against illegal immigration and derided, "...How is it possible to enforce these sorts of laws without sweeping up innocent citizens in the process?"

On Saturday's GMA, reporter Mike Von Fremd filed a report on the law, which instructs the police to stop anyone suspected of being illegal. The segment featured Eleanor Pelta of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, President Obama and a Hispanic man from Arizona. All opposed the legislation. Only Governor Jan Brewer was highlighted in defense of the bill.

Von Fremd also described it as a "sweeping anti-immigration" law, rather than anti-illegal immigration.

On Friday's World News, ABC 's Von Fremd again featured Pelta, who mocked, "Well, certainly, [the bill] resonates of a 'let-me-see-your-papers' environment." At least on that day's program, the show also touted John McCain's support of cracking down on illegal immigration.

A segment by correspondent Clayton Sandell on Saturday's World News followed a similar pattern. He observed that the Bishop of Los Angeles assailed the legislation as "Nazism." Conservative senatorial candidate J.D. Hayworth appeared briefly in a clip, but the show mostly focused on liberal complaints, such as those of Obama and of Phoenix's Democratic Mayor Phil Gordon.

On Saturday's GMA, Weir talked to Gordon and wondered if the Mayor would even enforce the law: "But, if this is still hung up in a lawsuit in some form in August, what will you tell your police chief who is essentially under orders to enforce this?"

In fairness, he did twice press Gordon on what his "fix" for the problem was. Weir also pointed out, "And the supporters of this, they'll point to the fact that a rancher was murdered near the border by a suspected smuggler just last month. And there some 460,000 illegal immigrants in your state."

Clearly, however, ABC's initial coverage of the bill has been slanted towards those who angrily oppose the legislation, allowing those who support it to be portrayed as fringe.

A transcript of Weir's interview with Sheriff Joe Arpaio on the April 25 GMA, which aired at 8:34am EDT, follows:

BILL WEIR: Now, to the battle over the toughest illegal immigration law in the land. Last night saw another vigil to protest this new law in Arizona which gives police power to stop anyone suspicious, demand proof of citizenship. There were protests Friday. More expected today. But, one man who is solidly behind this sort of enforcement and used it to reach international renowned as America's toughest sheriff. Maricopa County's Joe Arpaio. He joins us from Phoenix. Sheriff, thanks for being with us. Good morning.

SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO: Good morning.

WEIR: Good morning. The mayor of Phoenix was our guest here yesterday. And he says this law is going to drive a dangerous wedge between police and the lawful Hispanic citizens of your county. Here's what he had to say.

PHOENIX MAYOR PHIL GORDON: It's just hateful and spiteful and is going to make the state and city much less safe than safe.

WEIR: Your response?

JOE ARPAIO: Well, you know, he's been after me for three years. We've been enforcing the illegal immigration law with illegal immigration law. 38,000, we investigated and detained. No problems, except with the Justice Department. The mayor went to the Justice Department two years ago. They've launched an investigation against me and my officers about a year and a half ago. Nothing has happened on this alleged racial profile. So, they can talk and do everything they want. We're enforcing the laws, and I'm very comfortable with it.

WEIR: But, as you know, there have been several lawsuits, one in particular, Julio Mora, a U.S. citizen, and his father, a 30-year legal resident. They claim your deputies stopped them for no good reason, held them handcuffed for three hours. The merits of this particular case aside, how is it possible to enforce these sorts of laws without sweeping up innocent citizens in the process?

ARPAIO: I'm not going to comment on that law. It's a frivolous lawsuit. We'll see what happens. Our people are well trained. We act on reasonable suspicion. We act on probable cause and I'm very, very comfortable on how we operate and how law enforcement will operate under this new law.

WEIR: When we followed you over the years, you seemed to defend the actions of your officers, only pulling over speeders or those who violate traffic laws. You do have a lot of traffic stops. But with this new law, will you ramp it up? Will you- will you grab people on street corners? I mean, what will you do with this new law?

ARPAIO: Well, you know, we don't go on street corners and round up people and we won't do it under this new law, unless we have probable cause. We will continue our operations, nothing will change, we have been enforcing two other new state laws and federal laws. We're well trained. The Homeland Security trained 100 of my deputies. Of course, because of political reasons they took the authority away. But it doesn't matter. We've been training our deputies to enforce all of the federal and state illegal immigration laws.

—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

ABC: 'Mostly Peaceful' Immigration Protests vs. 'Very Ugly' Tea Party Rallies

 

View the Video Here

On Saturday's Good Morning America, reporter Mike Von Fremd downplayed the violence of protesters against Arizona's new immigration law. He spun, "Riot police were called in to try and control demonstrators protesting outside the capital. Most were peaceful. A handful threw bottles at police and were arrested." Yet, ABC derided March's Tea Party rallies as "very ugly," despite the fact that there were no arrests.

In contrast, on March 20, World News host David Muir scolded, "Protesters against the [health care] plan gathered on the streets of the capital where late today we learned words shouted turned very ugly, reports of racial and homophobic slurs, one protester actually spitting on a Congressman." Continuing to fret over those opposed the bill, he complained, "Late word from Washington tonight about just how ugly the crowds gathered outside the Longworth office building have become."

If Tea Party protesters had thrown bottles at members of Congress or police officers -- or anyone else, for that matter -- it seems unlikely that ABC would have described them as "mostly peaceful."

Over on NBC's Today show on Saturday, Telemundo's Jose Diaz Balart reported from the scene: "Tensions were high outside the Capitol. Four protesters were arrested." On CBS's Early Show, co-host Chris Wragge made only a quick reference to the protests: "On Friday, there were protests against the bill outside the state capitol in Phoenix."

—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

'Mostly Peacefully' Means 'Somewhat Violently' at the New York Times

 

The New York Times sometimes takes its politically correct blandishments to humorous extremes, as in Randal Archibold's lead story Saturday, "Arizona Enacts Stringent Law On Immigration." Check the curious way Archibold referred to a protest against Arizona's new anti-immigration law:

As hundreds of demonstrators massed, mostly peacefully, at the capitol plaza, the governor, speaking at a state building a few miles away, said the law "represents another tool for our state to use as we work to solve a crisis we did not create and the federal government has refused to fix."

Achibold didn't go into why he felt obliged to include the modifier "mostly." For that, one had to check out a local report filed Friday night that included details the Times left out:

Three people were arrested during the immigration rally at the state capitol Friday afternoon.

Two were arrested after they were seen throwing water bottles at police, according to a news release from the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the state police agency.

Evidently, "mostly peacefully" means "somewhat violently" at the New York Times.

This local news clip is even more dramatic, showing a police officer being nailed with a water bottle, one of many hurled in the semi-chaotic "march" that the headline terms a "small riot."

It's interesting that, for all the Times' hand-wringing over how the Tea Party movement is potentially inspiring violent acts, there has evidently yet to be a single documented case of violence or arrest at any of the many Tea Party functions. Meanwhile, here are three actual arrests at a single medium-sized rally dominated by left-wingers, and the Times doesn't find the fact worth mentioning.

Archibold followed up on Sunday with a "Woman in the News" profile of Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, after signing Arizona's tough anti-immigration law: "An Unexpected Governor Takes an Unwavering Course."

One night last week, Grant Woods, the former state attorney general, spent more than an hour on the telephone with Gov. Jan Brewer, a fellow Republican who was considering whether to sign into law the nation's toughest immigration enforcement bill.

The governor listened patiently, Mr. Woods recalled, as he laid out his arguments against the bill: that it would give too much power to the local police to stop people merely suspected of being illegal immigrants and would lead to racial profiling; that some local police officers have been abusive toward immigrants; and that the law could lead to costly legal battles for the state.

When he hung up, Mr. Woods knew he had lost the case. "She really felt that the majority of Arizonans fall on the side of, Let's solve the problem and not worry about the Constitution," he said.

Archibold continued his labeling slant in his coverage of the Arizona legislation, painting proponents of the law as "conservatives" but calling liberal opponents more flattering terms like "civil rights groups."

Ms. Brewer said she had pushed for language that explicitly bars the police from racial profiling, though that failed to mollify civil rights groups who complained that Latino citizens would inevitably be harassed or mistaken for illegal immigrants.

....

He saw that in her decision on the tax increase and to an extent her decision to support the immigration bill, despite the negative attention from national civil rights, religious and immigrant advocacy leaders.

"She is in Arizona running for governor as Republican at a time when Republicans are being controlled by different, conservative factions," he said.

Mary Rose Wilcox, a Democrat who served with her on the Board of Supervisors, said she had warmed to Ms. Brewer when they worked together to improve services to the homeless and the mentally ill.

But, Ms. Wilcox said, political considerations were never far from her mind, and Ms. Brewer kept close score on who was supporting which piece of legislation. She has approved much of the socially conservative legislation, including abortion restrictions, promoted by the Center for Arizona Policy, a conservative research group.

You can follow Times Watch on Twitter.

MSNBC News Flash: Arizona Law 'Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant'

 

During the Monday 12PM ET hour of live coverage on MSNBC, anchor Contessa Brewer described the "firestorm" over a newly passed immigration law in Arizona and fretted: "does this lead to a situation where neighbors are turning in neighbors or families turning against families?" Later in the segment, a headline on screen read: "Law Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant."

Brewer discussed the issue with Democratic Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez and wondered: "Is this an effective way to deal with the problem?" In response, Sanchez declared: "to stop people and say, 'I think you look like an illegal immigrant' and then drag them off to jail is not the way to deal with this issue."

Brewer followed up by quoting current Homeland Security Secretary and former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano: "she would veto these kinds of bills because she said – she thought it was important for police to be doing actual police work, that they are not immigration enforcement officers." As Brewer made that argument, the headline "Law Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant" flashed on screen.

Brewer later wondered about the political fallout: "It's forcing the President to address immigration policy. It's forcing Republicans and Democrats to wrangle with it. But what really is driving voters and emotion right now are jobs and the economy. Is this a bad issue politically at this time?" Sanchez replied: "I think this is a great issue politically at this time because, for the future in particular, the Hispanic community, which is a big immigrant community and which, of course, has some of the people who are with the least documents, correct documents, it is going to be the political force for the future in this country."

Here is a full transcript of the segment:

12:03PM

CONTESSA BREWER: And a political and legal firestorm brewing over Arizona's tough new immigration law. At least two Latino activist groups and the mayor of Phoenix are planning lawsuits, saying this could lead to racial profiling.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Papers Please; Firestorm Over AZ Immigration Law]

Some people are calling it unconstitutional. Among the key provisions in the law, a requirement for police to question anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. And over the weekend, demonstrators staged massive protests against the law. The law also makes it a crime to knowingly conceal, harbor, or shield an illegal immigrant. Essentially, I mean the question is, does this lead to a situation where neighbors are turning in neighbors or families turning against families? California Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez joins me now. Okay, let's take your state, for instance, there is a huge influx of illegal immigrants up and down the coast of California. Is this an effective way to deal with the problem?

LORETTA SANCHEZ: No. Absolutely not. First of all, there are a lot of people in the United States that haven't come over a border. They've actually come and they've either overstayed their visa or they haven't been able to renew their work visa, and they're – or they're in limbo, they're waiting. So they're what we call 'out of status.' And there are a lot of people like this. But to go after them, to stop people and say, 'I think you look like an illegal immigrant' and then drag them off to jail is not the way to deal with this issue. The issue we need to do is to deal with it on a national basis. We need to have a good visa program so that we can let workers who need to come to our country, come here and work, and not worry about hiding some place. And we need to fortify our borders in the correct manner, so that we can let the people we want to come in and keep people from coming in that we don't want.

CONTESSA BREWER: Janet Napolitano says that she – when she was the governor of Arizona, she would veto these kinds of bills because she said – she thought it was important for police to be doing actual police work, that they are not immigration enforcement officers.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Law Makes it a Crime to be Illegal Immigrant]

SANCHEZ: Absolutely. I mean, there is so much work already at the local level. I mean, think about all the police cuts we've taken, just in this downturn in the economy. The rise of problems with, whether it's rapists, pedophiles, robberies, et cetera. Our local police should be worried about that and the thing that happens, is if a community that is an immigrant community, whether legal or not, thinks that its police force, it's local police force is going to come and drag its people away, they will stop cooperating with police in bringing out the criminals.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Law Requires Police to Question Immigration Status]

BREWER: I should mention the Arizona law makes a provision there and says that if law enforcement think that questioning someone about their immigration status would interfere with an investigation, well then, in that case, they don't have to do it. One more question, let me talk about the politics of this. It's forcing the President to address immigration policy. It's forcing Republicans and Democrats to wrangle with it. But what really is driving voters and emotion right now are jobs and the economy. Is this a bad issue politically at this time?

SANCHEZ: I think this is a great issue politically at this time because, for the future in particular, the Hispanic community, which is a big immigrant community and which, of course, has some of the people who are with the least documents, correct documents, it is going to be the political force for the future in this country. One out of every four Americans is now of Hispanic decent, and soon it will be even a larger population, and we make the difference. Especially in places like Arizona, so I think that to move in a good direction with respect to immigration reform is actually better for this country.

BREWER: Congresswoman Sanchez, it's always a pleasure when you come on. I appreciate your time.

SANCHEZ: Thank you so much, Contessa. Thank you.

—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.

Matthews Urges James Cameron to Trash 'Dangerous' Global Warming Deniers in 'Right Wing Media'

 

View the Video Here

Chris Matthews spent an entire segment of Monday's Hardball sucking up to director James Cameron as the MSNBC host prodded the "Avatar" director to trash those in the "right wing media" who deny global warming, like Glenn Beck, as "very dangerous to this country." Cameron, who was on to plug the DVD version (coming soon to a landfill near you) of his pro-greenie fantasy flick, warned the Earth was being imperiled by not only the United States but also a rising middle class in places like India and China, and urged viewers to combat the "professional deniers" like Beck who are thwarting his fight against the "clear and present danger" of climate change. [audio available here]

CHRIS MATTHEWS: I'm worried about the media though. Because now we have a right wing media available. That if you feel like, if you're a business guy for example or a business woman and you want to have a good excuse, a good dodge not to do anything, well you listen to someone on the right like Beck who's willing to come in and say, "Oh you don't have to do anything. These guys are a bunch of tree huggers forget about it."

JAMES CAMERON: Right. Yeah.

MATTHEWS: What do you think of Beck's power in that direction, to give people a big excuse slip not to do anything?

CAMERON: Well guys like, like Beck and others and I think we all know-

MATTHEWS: Are they dangerous?

CAMERON: I think they're very dangerous to this country. And I think some day they're gonna have to answer to my children and to your children and their children for the world that they're helping to create right now.

The following is the full segment as it was aired on the April 26 Hardball:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Chances are if you've been to a movie in the past 20 years it was the work of James Cameron. Just to name a few: "The Terminator," "The Abyss," "True Lies," "Titanic," and now "Avatar." "Avatar is now the highest grossing movie of all-time, earning more than $2.7 billion worldwide and it's now out on DVD and Blu-Ray where it's also, just come out, and also broken all the world's records. James Cameron's concern about protecting the environment, which was such a big part of that movie, is evidenced in that film and it's also echoed in his life. Yesterday he spoke at the Earth Day rally here in Washington on the National Mall and I managed to catch up with him and hook him for the show. James Cameron.

JAMES CAMERON: Reporting for duty, sir.

MATTHEWS: No, no. I think what struck me about "Avatar" which everybody who's watched it has probably saw, was that there is a stake at some point the piggishness on this planet, the, the use of our resources just gets to the point where you gotta go out and get something else and go out and colonize some other world. Now maybe it's imagined in your movie but your feelings about that, that reality?

CAMERON: Well it's, it's a fantasy. I mean the film is a fantasy but, but it's about a very real reality which is our relationship with nature and how we have, we have this kind of attitude of entitlement that we can take what we need. Historically inn the colonial period, in North and South America, we took what we needed, you know? Or, or we took Australia or we took from what we needed from Africa. Speaking as kind of the way European community just kind of spread out. And we, we've never really backed off that model. We take the resources we needed, need. We take everything. We don't give enough back. And we're, we're crossing over a threshold where the Earth is not gonna be able to sustain us.

MATTHEWS: Why do you think business fights concerns about climate, about energy depletion, about the need to find renewables? Why do they fight it? These people from the oil patch, from Oklahoma especially-

CAMERON: Yeah.

MATTHEWS: -constantly carping and denying.

CAMERON: Sure.

MATTHEWS: People like Glenn Beck-

CAMERON: Sure.

MATTHEWS: -making a living by, by not telling the truth.

CAMERON: If you make your living in oil and the answer is a different answer, a different solution, and, and renewable energy like wind or solar or something like that, you're gonna deny that answer exists or, more probably, you're gonna deny that the problem exists and that's what these kind of professional deniers and skeptics are doing. They're swaying the public dialogue away from this major crisis that's looming.

MATTHEWS: Well the first person I ever heard, who I think has an IQ, like Glenn Beck, and he's obviously smart enough, I heard him on radio a couple years [ago] just denying-

CAMERON: Yeah.

MATTHEWS: -that there's climate. What do you make of that? Just saying it's not true.

CAMERON: Well you know look I think that people are, well people are just in denial in general. You know the public are in denial. And it's getting worse. And in, in a recession economy makes that denial worse. Two years ago according to polls, 50 percent of people believed in climate change and it being caused by, by, you know human activity. Now we're down to 34 percent. So we've gone from half to, to a third. We're going the wrong direction.

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

CAMERON: We should be raising awareness and consciousness on this and really, you know, believing that there's a clear and present danger to our nation, to our children and-

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

CAMERON: -and we're moving the wrong direction.

MATTHEWS: What do you make the decision a couple days ago to just dump it, just shelve it, by people like the Democratic leadership of the Senate. We are going towards an energy, combination energy, climate change bill? Just saying, "Oh we'll put it aside. We're gonna do something else. Immigration."

CAMERON: Well there's always going to be something. It's gonna be health care. It's gonna be immigration. It's gonna be financial reform. There's always gonna be something right in front of us that's more important. But in reality if we don't solve this problem, all of that stuff isn't gonna make any difference. Health care is not gonna help us in a fundamentally unhealthy planet. Financial reform is not gonna help us in a, in a, in a planet where we can't afford to, to live in a, in a healthy way or in even a non-chaotic way.

MATTHEWS: I gotta get to something that's fascinating. I read that Stephen Hawking-

CAMERON: Smart guy.

MATTHEWS: -obviously one of the smartest people in history. He was talking about alien life, meaning not aliens like we're fighting about with border fights here in America but-

CAMERON: Right, right.

MATTHEWS: -about real aliens over, from another planet. Quote: "We have only, we only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn't want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships having used all the resources from their home planet. If aliens ever visit us, I think it the outcome would be much, as when Christopher Columbus landed in America which didn't turn out very well for the Native Americans." What about the notion that horrific notion that aliens coming here, if we ever meet them there, would be like the ones in your movie? Avaricious and frightening.

CAMERON: I didn't know Stephen Hawking did, did science fiction. But I think he's right on the money. The history of the, of the human race is that any technologically superior nation when it met a technologically inferior – you know kind of guns against bows and arrows – they always took over. They took what they needed. They would, it was either genocide or the population was displaced or it was assimilated in some kind of paternalistic manner.

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

CAMERON: They were, you know, converted to Christianity or whatever it was. And this has been our history. So why would expect aliens be any different?

MATTHEWS: Well he, he puts us with bows and arrows and the aliens with the machine guns.

CAMERON: That's right, that's right. Exactly!

MATTHEWS: But you, in your movie, in "Avatar" at least put us on the side of the advanced weaponry but we end losing the war any way.

CAMERON: We were the bad aliens in "Avatar." I was turning it around. You've seen all these movies where the super advanced aliens come to Earth and they to try to be like us...

MATTHEWS: Yeah. The Orson Welles guys, yeah.

CAMERON: ...take over. Well "Avatar" is just the story turned around. Our main character is trying to blend in and be one of the, one of the, the aliens on their planet. It's just the same story-

MATTHEWS: So, so putting it all together – you have to go – putting it all together the idea that this country is leading the world in the depletion of resources in the world. We use more, we're the most poor sign of any people on the planet. We use up more gas, more everything, compared to our numbers. If the world keeps going in this direction heating up the planet, using up our resources, are we gonna end up on those space ships?

CAMERON: Yeah it's not just us. It's China, it's India, it's in places where the, where the middle class is, is exploding. Everybody is sucking up more power. Populations continuing to grow. You know we're gonna have to do something about it. The, the planet just can't sustain-

MATTHEWS: Do you have your faith, do you have faith in any - I'm gonna let you leave on this. Do you have faith in any political leader who will take the, the, the noise and the heat and perhaps the political defeat that will come from a person who really stands up and defends this planet?

CAMERON: Lisa Jackson at the EPA is standing up. You know she's using the Clean Air Act to go after polluters. But the reality is that, that the leadership in the House and Senate, it doesn't have a strong public mandate right now because the public isn't aware enough of the problem. They gotta, they gotta start critically thinking, denying the deniers, doing their own research, not, not, not going with the rhetoric, not going with the talk radio. Actually learning the issues. And believing what the science community is trying to warn us about and then there will be a public mandate for our leaders to do something. You know, you know on the Hill they don't do anything unless we tell them to do it.

MATTHEWS: I know. I'm worried about the media though. Because now we have a right wing media available. That if you feel like, if you're a business guy for example or a business woman and you want to have a good excuse, a good dodge not to do anything, well you listen to someone on the right like Beck who's willing to come in and say, "Oh you don't have to do anything. These guys are a bunch of tree huggers forget about it."

CAMERON: Right. Yeah.

MATTHEWS: What do you think of Beck's power in that direction, to give people a big excuse slip not to do anything?

CAMERON: Well guys like, like Beck and others and I think we all know-

MATTHEWS: Are they dangerous?

CAMERON: I think they're very dangerous to this country. And I think some day they're gonna have to answer to my children and to your children and their children for the world that they're helping to create right now.

MATTHEWS: Okay. Thank you very much, James Cameron. Congratulations. I've ever seen anything like this in the movies. I've never seen anything like it. You are winning all the awards and you're getting everything. Thank you for coming on.

CAMERON: Alright thanks Chris. A pleasure.

MATTHEWS: James Cameron, the maker of "Avatar" which has just broken all the records again on DVD.

—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.

CBS's Smith: 'Will Anyone in GOP Break Ranks' on Financial Reform?

 

At the top of Monday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith referenced a possible Senate vote on the Democrats' financial reform bill and proclaimed: "Showdown in the Senate. Democrats are scrambling to get enough votes. Will anyone in the GOP break ranks?" It was just the latest example of a week of CBS coverage pressuring Republicans to sign on to the controversial legislation.

In a later report, correspondent Nancy Cordes explained: "both parties say they are for reform and they are deep in negotiations over it....But without a deal, many, if not all, Senate Republicans plan to vote 'no' today, blocking a floor debate on the bill." That was followed by a clip of Democratic Senator Chris Dodd declaring: "Here we are 17 months after someone broke into our house, in effect, robbed us, and we still haven't even changed the locks on the doors." A headline on screen read: "Financial Reform Showdown; Will Anyone in GOP Break Ranks?"

In his introduction to the report, Smith described the Democratic effort as a "test vote." Cordes pointed out: "this vote that Democrats have called for today could very well fail." She later concluded: "Even if the vote fails today, negotiations will go on and Republicans and Democrats seem confident that a financial reform bill will pass sooner rather than later." However, neither her nor Smith questioned holding the vote or suggested it was political theater to force a deal.

Following Cordes's report, Smith asked Republican Congressman Darrell Issa about GOP objections to the bill: "This legislation is supposed to help prevent big banks from taking risks that ultimately will take down the economy like we saw 18 or 19 months ago. Do you see things in this legislation, as it stands right now, that can do that?" Issa replied by pointing out an obvious flaw in the legislation:

What Republicans are asking for, when you say big banks, you have to realize the biggest bank-like entities involved in this were Freddie [Mac] and Fannie [Mae]....entities that had something to do with, you know, basically a meltdown that began with too many mortgages, many of them bought – bought and encouraged by the federal government.

Over the past week, the Early Show failed to note that the government-backed mortgage lenders were not addressed as part of the supposed reform of the financial industry. Even after Issa brought up the subject, Smith dismissed it as a side issue, instead wanting to only focus on the private sector: "In the end, though, those things were turned into derivatives that were traded all over the place, which gave impetus to the market that said this can go on forever."

Here is a full transcript of the segment:

7:00AM TEASE

HARRY SMITH: Showdown in the Senate. Democrats are scrambling to get enough votes. Will anyone in the GOP break ranks? We'll take you to Capitol Hill.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Reform Showdown]

7:08AM SEGMENT

SMITH:  Now to the showdown in the Senate. Democrats are pressing ahead with a possible test vote on financial reform even though they may not have enough votes. CBS News congressional correspondent Nancy Cordes is in Washington with details and the numbers. Nancy, good morning.

NANCY CORDES: Good morning to you, Harry. That's right, both parties say they are for reform and they are deep in negotiations over it. But they're not there yet, which means this vote that Democrats have called for today could very well fail.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Financial Reform Showdown; Will Anyone in GOP Break Ranks?]

RICHARD SHELBY: I think we will get a bill. If the Democrats want a bill and will give us some things that we think that are substantive in nature.

CORDES: But without a deal, many, if not all, Senate Republicans plan to vote 'no' today, blocking a floor debate on the bill.

CHRIS DODD: Here we are 17 months after someone broke into our house, in effect, robbed us, and we still haven't even changed the locks on the doors.

CORDES: Republicans think the bill needs to make it clear, failing firms will not be bailed out. And they think that consumer protections and regulations on derivatives in the bill are too onerous.

MITCH MCCONNELL: This is not a situation where anybody I know in the Senate wants no bill to pass, but it is important to pass a good bill.

CORDES: Tomorrow, the CEO of Goldman Sachs will come to Capitol Hill to testify. He'll likely be asked about newly released internal e-mails that show his company profited from the mortgage meltdown. 'Sounds like we will make some serious money,' emailed one employee to another as foreclosures mounted. In another online exchange, one trader told another, 'I'm not so convinced this is a total death spiral. In fact, we may have terrific opportunities.'

LARRY SUMMERS: This underscores what is at the center of the President's vision here. The importance of transparency, the importance of things being in the open.

CORDES: Even if the vote fails today, negotiations will go on and Republicans and Democrats seem confident that a financial reform bill will pass sooner rather than later. Harry.

SMITH: Nancy Cordes on Capitol Hill this morning. Thank you. One of the critics of the financial reform bill is Republican Congressman Darrell Issa of California. He joins us now from Washington. Congressman, good morning.

DARRELL ISSA: Good morning, Harry.

SMITH: This legislation is supposed to help prevent big banks from taking risks that ultimately will take down the economy like we saw 18 or 19 months ago. Do you see things in this legislation, as it stands right now, that can do that?

ISSA: Well, there are some things in this legislation. What Republicans are asking for, when you say big banks, you have to realize the biggest bank-like entities involved in this were Freddie and Fannie. And we're still sitting there with trillions of dollars of underwater loans. So, yes, we want to have reform, but it's clear that a 'no' vote today by 41 Republicans is a 'yes' vote to do more comprehensive reform, more balanced reform, including the other entities that had something to do with, you know, basically a meltdown that began with too many mortgages, many of them bought – bought and encouraged by the federal government.
                                    
SMITH: In the end, though, those things were turned into derivatives that were traded all over the place, which gave impetus to the market that said this can go on forever. We'll come back and ask a different question, though. This bailout fund that's sort of looming out there, this sort of idea of putting together about $50 billion, probably paid for by the banks, that would help deconstruct a bank if it came up to the edge and would be on the verge of going out of business, good idea or bad idea?

ISSA: Well, Harry, I think what we have to remember is there already is a fund for banks. What we're talking about here is bank-like entities. And the last thing we need to do is to further confuse what is bank and what isn't a bank. After all, AIG was an insurance company, but AIGFP in England, that did most of these guarantees that went bad, in fact, wasn't even an insurance company by real U.S. standards. So I think what we have to do in financial reform is say what is a bank and it gets one set of rules. Financial institutions get another. And insurance companies, quite frankly, have to be a big part of the new regulation, along with rating agencies that told us things were triple A, when they weren't even triple B.

SMITH: You got that right. Congressman Issa, thank you very much for your time for your time this morning, do appreciate it.

ISSA: My pleasure.

—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.

 

---  # You are currently subscribed to cyber-html as: jayman2124@gmail.com..  # Comments or subscription problems (email): CyberComment@mediaresearch.org  # To subscribe to this or other MRC newsletters: MRC newsletter subscriptions  # To unsubscribe from this or other MRC newsletters: Unsubscribe from MRC