Fwd: Pelosi Calls for Amnesty for Illegal Aliens

Today's Headlines Friday, May 14, 2010

Pelosi Calls for Amnesty for Illegal Aliens (CNSNews.com) - "Hopefully, we will be moving toward comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders, enforces our laws, protects our workers, honors family unification and has a path to legalization--so that we have certainty in our country and respect for the contributions that newcomers bring to us," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Capitol Hill Wednesday. The Federal Fat Police: Bill Would Require Government to Track Body Mass of American Children (CNSNews.com) - A bill introduced this month in Congress would put the federal and state governments in the business of tracking how fat, or skinny, American children are. States receiving federal grants provided for in the bill would require all health care providers ito annually track the Body Mass Index of all children ages 2 through 18. The information would end up at the Department of Health and Human Services for analysis. Holder Won't Say If Justice Dept. Is Investigating Sestak's Claim He Was Offered Administration Job Not to Run Against Specter Washington (CNSNews.com) – Attorney General Eric Holder refuses to say if the Justice Department is looking into an allegation by Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) that the White House offered him an administration job as an enticement to drop his primary challenge against Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.). After five minutes of evading the question asked by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Holder's final answer was no comment. Holder Uncertain if Radical Islam Influenced Terrorists Washington (CNSNews.com) - Attorney General Eric Holder repeatedly tried to avoid answering a congressman's question on whether radical Islam was a motivating factor in recent attacks and attempted attacks on U.S. soil. "There are a variety of reasons," Holder kept insisting. Arizona Religious Leaders Press for 'Pathway to Citizenship,' Say U.S. Has Moral Obligation to Stop Influx of Drugs (CNSNews.com) - Securing the border is only one aspect of immigration reform. The United States must find 'legal avenues' to deal with people coming into the country illegally as well as those illegal aliens who are already here, the delegation agreed. U.S. Joins U.N. Initiative Whose Stated Goal Is to Bridge Islam-West Divide (CNSNews.com) – The U.S. has signed on to a U.N. project whose stated aim is to build bridges between Islam and the West, but critics worry it is linked to an agenda that restricts free expression, especially when it comes to media coverage viewed as critical towards Islam. The Alliance of Civilizations is described as a project 'to bridge divides and overcome prejudice, misconceptions, misperceptions.' But critics say joining it will not advance U.S. interests. Many 'Free' Countries Voted for Libya to Join U.N. Human Rights Council (CNSNews.com) – Despite appeals by numerous human rights advocacy groups to bar Libya from holding a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, only 33 countries did so in a secret ballot election held on Thursday. In total, Thursday's election at the U.N. General Assembly in New York produced a Human Rights Commission with fewer "free" countries than ever – only 20 of the 47 members. The Obama administration brought the U.S. into the HRC last year. Americans Who Don't Attend Church Form Base of Obama's Support, Gallup Polling Indicates (CNSNews.com) - President Barack Obama's overall approval rating stood at 49 percent for the most recent three-day period, and at 50 percent for the week ending May 8, but it would be lower than that if America consisted exclusively of people who attend church with some regularity. Non-church goers form the base of Obama's support, according to Gallup polling data. CNSNEWS.COM VIDEO Rachael Ray Backs 'Uniform,' 'Level Playing Ground' for Public School Cafeterias (CNSNews.com) - 'Some of the public schools I've been to, they're eating baked chicken and dark leafy greens and fresh fruits and vegetables, and then other schools, they don't even have the equipment, or the funds, or the ability to offer any of those products,' celebrity chef Rachel Ray told CNSNews.com. OTHER CNSNEWS.COM HEADLINES Consumer Spending Rises for Seventh Straight Month 'Hawala' Money Transfer System Frustrates Anti-Terror Probes New 'Al-Qaida in Iraq' Chief Vows Blood-Soaked Days Bangkok Battle: Troops Fire on Rioting Protesters Transportation Secretary LaHood Checks Out High-Speed Trains in China Small Business Lobby Joins Challenge to Health Care Law U.N. Climate Chief Defends Work, Welcomes Review Chinese Scientists Say Cigarette Butts Protect Steel From Corrosion 'Rising Global Temperatures Cooking Lots of Lizards' Turkish PM Visits Troubled Greece, Backs Arms Cuts 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: Customs commissioner neglected to file "nanny" forms on household employees President Obama's school plan, built around a contest, riles lawmakers Thousands of non-profits could unwittingly lose tax status Federal Protective Service agents fan out in D.C. for surprise building inspections Pelosi: No question that voters are in an 'anti-incumbent' mood Deficit worries make it tough for Democrats to move on the Medicare 'doc fix' Swim club in race-bias case is sold at auction U.S. military testing laser weapons Attorney General Eric Holder hasn't read Ariz. immigration bill Obama hugs NY Times reporter Activists protest Al Gore's honorary degree at University of Tennessee Thousands sign petition protesting Empire State Building's snub of Mother Teresa Study finds that effects of low-quality child care last into adolescence Group worries ban on drilling permits will cost jobs Rep. Barney Frank battles for transgender workers' rights Liberal State of Vermont one of just a few trying tax cuts COMMENTARY Are Liberals Anti-WASP? By Patrick J. Buchanan Of the last seven justices nominated by Democrats JFK, LBJ, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, one was black, one was Puerto Rican, and the other five were Jews. If Kagan is confirmed, Jews, who represent less than 2 percent of the U.S. population, will have 33 percent of the Supreme Court seats. Is this the Democrats' idea of diversity? Not in living memory has a Democratic president nominated an Irish, Italian or Polish Catholic, though these ethnic communities once gave the party its greatest victories in the cities and states of the North. And not in nearly half a century has a Democratic president nominated a white Protestant or white Catholic man or woman. Our Busted Deportation System Strikes Again By Michelle Malkin Wouldn't it be grand if the Obama administration cared more about policing our borders than about policing our refrigerators? How about fixing our deportation system instead of fixing our junk-food diets? First Lady Michelle Obama argued this week that obesity is a "national security" issue. But her husband allows far greater threats to go unabated. Operation Overlord II By Rich Galen U.S. taxpayers are once again stepping up to bail out Europe. At some point America is going to have to cut Europe loose. We're going off to play with China for the next 150-or-so years. Jesus, Mohammed, and Comedy Central By L. Brent Bozell III It's clear that Mohammed is off limits for the U.S. entertainment industry, and it's just as crystal clear that Jesus Christ remains the juiciest of targets.

Fwd: Morning Bell: Congress' Historic Decision to Ignore Its Basic Duty

05/14/2010 Congress' Historic Decision to Ignore Its Basic Duty House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) once said that the "most basic responsibility of governing is to pass a budget." Yesterday it became clear that Congress has decided to shirk that responsibility, as word broke that the House likely will not pass a budget resolution for the first time since the modern budget process was created in 1974. That's earthshaking news, especially given the ballooning federal spending, which soared to an $82.69 billion deficit in April, a projected $1.5 trillion deficit in 2010, and even more deficits as far as the eye can see. Like any American's household budget that tracks income and expenses, budget resolutions set a framework for Congress' taxing and spending. But it's a framework that the leadership in the House would rather do without. The news came from Rep. Hoyer himself, who said "It's difficult to pass budgets in election years because they reflect what the [fiscal] status is." In other words, with November looming on the horizon, the left doesn't want their constituents to realize just how much Congress is spending and how high taxes will go.

Fwd: MRC Alert: As Polls Show Overwhelming Support for Arizona's Law, Nets Focus on 'Uproar' and 'Spreading' Boycotts

 

A daily compilation edited by Brent H. Baker, CyberAlert items are drawn from daily BiasAlert posts and distributed by the Media Research Center's News Analysis Division, the leader since 1987 in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias.

 

Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996
Friday May 14, 2010 @ 09:07 AM EDT

1. As Polls Show Overwhelming Support for Arizona's Law, Nets Focus on 'Uproar' and 'Spreading' Boycotts
The night after two major national polls confirmed overwhelming majorities support Arizona's impending immigration enforcement statute (59 percent per Pew and 64 percent per NBC/WSJ), CBS and ABC promoted the cause of activists in the minority. Both devoted full stories to the "uproar" and "emotional civil war" over the law and moves by a few liberal local government bodies to enact boycotts, only getting late in their stories to those who like the law. The Thursday night stories were pegged to a boycott vote by the Democratic city council of Los Angeles, but CBS's Bill Whitaker and ABC's Barbara Pinto both also played a three-day old clip of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger mocking Arizona and pointed to the cancellation of a trip to Arizona by a suburban Chicago high school's girls basketball team – not to deride adults for using teens to grind a political axe, but to illustrate the supposed depth of opposition to Arizona's law. "The boycott of Arizona is spreading," Katie Couric trumpeted.

2. MSNBC's Ratigan Rants: Military 'Dropping Predator Bombs On Civilians Willy-Nilly'
On Wednesday's Dylan Ratigan Show on MSNBC, host Dylan Ratigan didn't see any point to continuing the war in Afghanistan and slammed military air strikes against terrorist targets as: "kids with joysticks in New Jersey and Las Vegas dropping predator bombs on civilians willy-nilly." Earlier, Ratigan declared: "the Bush doctrine of fight them there and they won't get us here appears to be continuing to break down as we now default to just predator drone-them-to-death wherever they may be on remote control and an apparent, sort of, nonevent in Afghanistan. It's like a charade."

3. George Stephanopoulos Laments Obama's Inability to Help Democrats
Good Morning America's George Stephanopoulos on Thursday appeared frustrated that perceived successes by Barack Obama have failed to help his own party. The former Democratic operative turned journalist interviewed James Carville and complained, "You know, you've seen over the last month health care passes. Jobs are being created. The President has an arms control agreement with the Russians." Stephanopoulos added, "Yet, nothing seems to move these [poll] numbers."

4. MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Derides Obama for 'Going Overboard' With 'Pseudo' Kagan Interview
MSNBC reporter Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday actually expressed some journalistic outrage over a White House PR video disguised as an interview, deriding the administration for "crossing a number of lines when it comes to journalism." An irritated Mitchell highlighted a video on the White House website that features Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan.

---

 

As Polls Show Overwhelming Support for Arizona's Law, Nets Focus on 'Uproar' and 'Spreading' Boycotts

 

The night after two major national polls confirmed overwhelming majorities support Arizona's impending immigration enforcement statute (59 percent per Pew and 64 percent per NBC/WSJ), CBS and ABC promoted the cause of activists in the minority. Both devoted full stories to the "uproar" and "emotional civil war" over the law and moves by a few liberal local government bodies to enact boycotts, only getting late in their stories to those who like the law.

The Thursday night stories were pegged to a boycott vote by the Democratic city council of Los Angeles, but CBS's Bill Whitaker and ABC's Barbara Pinto both also played a three-day old clip of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger mocking Arizona and pointed to the cancellation of a trip to Arizona by a suburban Chicago high school's girls basketball team – not to deride adults for using teens to grind a political axe, but to illustrate the supposed depth of opposition to Arizona's law.

"The boycott of Arizona is spreading," Katie Couric trumpeted before Whitaker touted: "The city of Los Angeles, the latest to react strongly to Arizona's tough new anti-illegal immigration law." He pushed how "a growing number of states and municipalities are boycotting or considering boycotting Arizona," citing how "Highland Park High School in Chicago's suburbs is pulling its champion girls' basketball team from a tournament in Arizona because of the law."

Cuing up Schwarzenegger, Whitaker insisted: "The state has become the butt of jokes." Schwarzenegger, from Monday, on not traveling to Arizona: "But with my accent, I was worried they were going to deport me back to Austria."

Over on ABC, Barbara Pinto announced "Los Angeles now joins San Francisco and St. Paul, Minnesota, banning travel to the state." Standing in front of the Illinois high school, Pinto relayed:

A list of boycotts costing Arizona an estimated $90 million so far. This heated debate is even playing out here at this suburban Chicago High School, 1,800 miles away. Administrators cancelled the Highland Park girls basketball team's trip to an Arizona tournament amid concerns about the new law.

She did at least then a play a clip of a parent wondering: "What does the immigration law have to do with us going to play sports in Arizona?"

ABC anchor Diane Sawyer noted the Pew number at the top of the World News story while CBS's Whitaker only got to it deep in his report. Neither mentioned the higher NBC/Wall Street Journal number.

CBS Evening News, Thursday, May 13:

KATIE COURIC: The uproar continues over Arizona's new immigration law. The commissioner of Major League Baseball today brushed off calls from Latino groups to move next year's All-Star game out of Phoenix. But Bill Whitaker reports, the boycott of Arizona is spreading.

BILL WHITAKER: For every action in nature there's an opposite reaction, so, too, in politics. The city of Los Angeles, the latest to react strongly to Arizona's tough new anti-illegal immigration law. City council voted yesterday to ban city travel to Arizona, ban future contracts with Arizona businesses, and to check whether $58 million in existing contracts can be broken legally.

JOSE HUIZAR, LA CITY COUNCIL: We have to act swiftly and strongly.

WHITAKER: Councilman Jose Huizar's grandfather helped to build LA City Hall as a Mexican guest worker in the 1920s.

JOSE HUIZAR: We fear what Arizona did will continue to spread to other states.

WHITAKER: A growing number of states and municipalities are boycotting or considering boycotting Arizona, pushing the state to repeal the law. Highland Park high school in Chicago's suburbs is pulling its champion girls' basketball team from a tournament in Arizona because of the law. Arizona's tourism board estimates it's losing $90 million to boycotts already. The state has become the butt of jokes.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, ON MONDAY: But with my accent, I was worried they were going to deport me back to Austria.

WHITAKER: Still, a majority of Americans, 59 percent according to a Pew poll out this week, support the Arizona law requiring everyone to produce proof of citizenship when asked by police. In fact, 16 states are considering legislation similar to Arizona's. State Senator Russell Pearce wrote the controversial law.

RUSSELL PEARCE: Arizona spend $3 billion a year to educate Medicaid and incarcerate illegal aliens. It is a serious problem.

WHITAKER: And a serious challenge to Arizona's image and pocketbook, but so far Arizona stands willing to pay the price for its actions. Bill Whitaker, CBS News, Los Angeles.

ABC's World News:

DIANE SAWYER: Here at home, a new poll shows the majority of Americans, 59 percent, support Arizona's tough law requiring police to check the documentation of anyone they suspect might be an illegal immigrant. But all around the country, a kind of emotional civil war continues. Some people deciding to try to hit Arizona in the pocketbook. Today's developments from Barbara Pinto.

BARBARA PINTO: This is an out and out brawl, a nation choosing sides. California's Governor Schwarzenegger for one.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER: I was also going to go and give a commencement speech in Arizona, but with my accent I was worried they would deport me back to Austria.

PINTO: Los Angeles now joins San Francisco and St. Paul, Minnesota, banning travel to the state.

WOMAN: Los Angeles is not going to stand for bigotry, for racism and for attacks on immigrants.

PINTO: A list of boycotts costing Arizona an estimated $90 million so far. This heated debate is even playing out here at this suburban Chicago High School, 1,800 miles away. Administrators cancelled the Highland Park girls basketball team's trip to an Arizona tournament amid concerns about the new law.

MICHAEL EVANS, FATHER OF BASKETBALL PLAYER: What does the immigration law have to do with us going to play sports in Arizona?

PINTO: Arizona is home no nearly a half million illegal immigrants. It's new law pits neighbor against neighbor.

ALEJANDRA CHACON, LEGAL IMMIGRANT: This is not about immigration anymore. This is about the color of our skin, the way we talk, the way we learn.

PINTO: Across town-

DONNA NEILLE: One night, we hear pop, pop, pop.

PINTO: -Donna and Jerry Neille watched the flood of illegal immigrants and crime move into their neighborhood.

DONNA NEILLE: The gangs. You know, that's really what is scary about all of this, it's these gangs. They're vicious. They're violent.

PINTO: And then there's the 700 mile border fence, promised by Congress. Today, only 34 miles are up, nine of them in Arizona, which has a border hundreds of miles long. The issue is so inflamed that John McCain, once a champion for immigrant rights, is scrambling to be identified with that fence.

JOHN McCAIN IN TV AD: And complete the danged fence.

PINTO: Today, religious leaders protested outside his door, in this border battle that is nowhere near an end. Barabara Pinto, ABC News, Highland Park, Illinois.

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

MSNBC's Ratigan Rants: Military 'Dropping Predator Bombs On Civilians Willy-Nilly'

 

View the Video Here

On Wednesday's Dylan Ratigan Show on MSNBC, host Dylan Ratigan didn't see any point to continuing the war in Afghanistan and slammed military air strikes against terrorist targets as: "kids with joysticks in New Jersey and Las Vegas dropping predator bombs on civilians willy-nilly." [Audio available here]        

Ratigan began a panel discussion on Afghanistan with Democratic strategist David Goodfriend and Republican strategist Brent Littlefield by wondering: "Is there anybody in this administration on either side that can actually justify the American presence in Afghanistan at this point?" Littlefield attempted to explain: "we had the previous president, took the country in there because of the attacks on 9/11." Ratigan was dismissive: "That was almost ten years ago, right? I mean that was a long time ago."

Ratigan moved on to Goodfriend and referenced NBC correspondent Richard Engel's appearance on the show on Tuesday: "He is making the point that the Bush doctrine of fight them there and they won't get us here appears to be continuing to break down as we now default to just predator drone-them-to-death wherever they may be on remote control and an apparent, sort of, nonevent in Afghanistan. It's like a charade." Of course the reliance on predator drone attacks was significantly increased under the Obama administration.

Again, Ratigan saw no reason for the war and actually blamed it for creating terrorism: "I don't understand how this war in Afghanistan is protecting me from a car bomber in midtown. In fact, I'm concerned that the war in Afghanistan is creating more car bombers in Pakistan that want to come to midtown." He then asked Goodfriend: "Is there a rational defense that you have heard for America being in Afghanistan a decade after we went in to degrade the Taliban?" As Goodfriend began to answer, Ratigan interrupted and proclaimed: "And every soldier, every journalist, every person you talk to says, 'I don't know why we're in Afghanistan.'"

Goodfriend largely agreed with Ratigan's assessment and noted: "we actually supported the Taliban when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan." Ratigan interjected: "Of course, we armed them." Goodfriend added: "it's yet another example of you know, unfortunately, the United States feeling that we can sort of change the course of history in this part of the world that even Alexander the Great failed to change."

An exasperated Ratigan then whined: "why is anybody in this country safer because we're spending a lot of money and spending a bunch our soldiers and weapons to a land-locked mountainous nation in the Middle East for the past ten years, and appear to be doing – staying there for God knows how much longer?" Again, Goodfriend agreed: "I happen to believe that we spend too much money on the military as it is. $700 Billion a year is too much....I think this nation of ours would do better with half, 50%, the military budget we have today."

In concluding the segment, Ratigan again cited Engel's criticism of the war and ranted: "America's knickers are into a bunch to the point it's ready to throw everybody out because we're taking people to the Caribbean without giving them proper rights and putting them in prison but having kids with joysticks in New Jersey and Las Vegas dropping predator bombs on civilians willy-nilly is a valid foreign policy, strikes me as if I've gone crazy....nobody's going to defend it, it's crazy."

Here is a full transcript of the segment:

4:13PM

DYLAN RATIGAN: We begin, though, with the Afghan President Hamid Karzai. He's visiting the White House today, as you likely know. Karzai and the President spoke to reporters after private meetings on the war effort. Each leader downplaying highly publicized tensions between the two administrations.

BARACK OBAMA: Obviously, they're going to be tensions in such a complicated difficult environment. A lot of them were simply overstated.

HAMID KARZAI: There are moments that we speak frankly to each other. And that frankness would only add to the strength of the relationship.

RATIGAN: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying Karzai's meetings this week will determine whether or not she helps to secure congressional approval for a $33 billion war-funding bill, that of course being your money. Here to 'Mix It Up,' our panel, former Clinton White House staffer David Goodfriend and Republican strategist Brent Littlefield. Pleasure to see you both. Brent, I'll begin with you. Is there anybody in this administration on either side that can actually justify the American presence in Afghanistan at this point?

BRENT LITTLEFIELD: Well, look, we had the previous president, took the country in there because of the attacks on 9/11. And that-

RATIGAN: That was almost ten years ago, right? I mean that was a long time ago.  

LITTLEFIELD: That's right. That's right. And we have a current president that campaigned on and has continued to say that he's going to increase our presence and increase our activity in Afghanistan. I think what happened today was fascinating. At the end of the last administration, Hamid Karzai, in his last press conference with President Bush thanked the American people. And then since that time, we've had the White House press secretary fighting with Karzai, saying that he was making statements against the West that were tirades, that he was railing on the West.

RATIGAN: Sure.

LITTLEFIELD: Clearly Karzai hasn't been happy and now they're back there claiming that they're holding hands and there just were minor differences. I guess you just played a clip, the President said there were minor differences, but it was his own press secretary that was attacking Karzai about a month ago. So it's fascinating to watch what's happening there today.

RATIGAN: David, Richard Engel was on the program yesterday. He's in New York, obviously having spend a tremendous portion of his career, still, in the Middle East covering these wars in Afghanistan, on the ground. He is making the point that the Bush doctrine of fight them there and they won't get us here appears to be continuing to break down as we now default to just predator drone-them-to-death wherever they may be on remote control and an apparent, sort of, nonevent in Afghanistan. It's like a charade. I don't understand how this war in Afghanistan is protecting me from a car bomber in midtown. In fact, I'm concerned that the war in Afghanistan is creating more car bombers in Pakistan that want to come to midtown. Is there a rational defense that you have heard for America being in Afghanistan a decade after we went in to degrade the Taliban?

DAVID GOODFRIEND: Well, is there a rational defense, yes. Whether or not I agree with it is probably immaterial.

RATIGAN: And what is it? I mean, yeah, sure.

GOODFRIEND: Fair enough.

RATIGAN: What is – what's the rational defense to spending $10 there for every $1 we spend here. And every soldier, every journalist, every person you talk to says, 'I don't know why we're in Afghanistan.' The only reason we're fighting is because we're in Afghanistan.

GOODFRIEND: Well, I think that may be oversimplifying it. Look, let me give you the rationale and then, if I may, I'd like to answer your broader question.

RATIGAN: Go for it.

GOODFRIEND: Which is why should we spend it? So the rationale really has to do with the leadership of the Taliban, its location both in Pakistan and Afghanistan. And the Taliban now emerging – not Al Qaeda mind you – but Taliban now emerging as a hotbed of terrorist activity. And look, one of the things I was thinking about before coming on the show, and this gets more to your broader question of 'why are we there,' we actually supported the Taliban when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.

RATIGAN: Of course, we armed them.

GOODFRIEND: And so – and so it's yet another example of you know, unfortunately, the United States feeling that we can sort of change the course of history in this part of the world that even Alexander the Great failed to change. So you know, look we're-

RATIGAN: But the question is, why am I safer? Why are you safer? Why is Brent safer? Why are our viewer – why is anybody in this country safer because we're spending a lot of money and spending a bunch our soldiers and weapons to a land-locked mountainous nation in the Middle East for the past ten years, and appear to be doing – staying there for God knows how much longer. Do you – do you have any-

GOODFRIEND: I mean, look, Dylan – look, Dylan, maybe I'm not the right guy for this – for this particular segment. I happen to believe that we spend too much money on the military as it is. $700 Billion a year is too much. I don't think that with a hundred bases overseas, our national security is better. I think what we need are jobs and more of that money for folks here at home. You are talking to a guy who agrees with you on that. Now, that having been said, is the President rational when he says we ought to be doing more to attack the bases of the terrorists? Sure. But you know what, he's even said in 2011, that's next year, that the number of troops, the American troops, starts to come down and we have other forms of support, economic support. So look, I think this nation of ours would do better with half, 50%, the military budget we have today.

RATIGAN: Yeah.

GOODFRIEND: Okay?

RATIGAN: And that's for another day, but what strikes me, again, is the Richard Engel comment. America's knickers are into a bunch to the point it's ready to throw everybody out because we're taking people to the Caribbean without giving them proper rights and putting them in prison but having kids with joysticks in New Jersey and Las Vegas dropping predator bombs on civilians willy-nilly is a valid foreign policy, strikes me as if I've gone crazy. We'll save it for another day.

GOODFRIEND: Look, you're not going to get me to defend it. I wish-

RATIGAN: No I'm not, I know. I get it. No listen, nobody's going to defend it, it's crazy. 

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

George Stephanopoulos Laments Obama's Inability to Help Democrats

 

Good Morning America's George Stephanopoulos on Thursday appeared frustrated that perceived successes by Barack Obama have failed to help his own party. The former Democratic operative turned journalist interviewed current Democratic operative James Carville and complained, "You know, you've seen over the last month health care passes. Jobs are being created. The President has an arms control agreement with the Russians."

Stephanopoulos added, "Yet, nothing seems to move these [poll] numbers." Back on March 1, 2010, the morning show host was more hopeful.

He repeated liberal talking points about the effect passing health care would have: "...The Democrats in the White House who are pushing for this strategy, pushing for passage, say that once this does pass, the country will get it. Democrats will be unified. They'll get a huge benefit."

On Thursday, Stephanopoulos again cited the White House and seemed to declare Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court a done deal: "But, you know, the White House has this 48-hour rule, saying that the nominations are won and loss in the first 48 hours. Is this one already over?"

How did the then-host of This Week react to the early days of John Roberts nomination to the Supreme Court. On the July 24, 2005 edition of the program, he touted Democratic options:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Democrats do have a dilemma here,...You can look at [Roberts] and say, 'You know what? He is well qualified, he is well liked. He's got great credentials. Let's give him a pass so say we were reasonable and fight hard on the next one.' The other philosophy is, 'No, you got to brush him back now to send a message to the White House.'"

On the same program, Stephanopoulos did allow that the Roberts pick might be headed towards a "coronation." On Thursday, however, there was no talk of "sending a message" to Obama.

The host did at least acknowledged reality. Talking to Carville and Republican Bay Buchanan, he observed, "But, then you dig into it and say when you just talk to the voters most likely to show up at the polls in November, a huge, huge advantage for the Republicans. 56 for the Republicans. Only 36 for Democrats. James Carville, this is the worst warning sign yet for the Democrats."

A transcript of the May 13 segment, which aired at 7:07am EDT, follows:

STEPHANOPOULOS: We're going to turn now to politics. As the President's latest nominee for the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan made her courtesy calls on Capitol Hill yesterday. A new poll out just this morning shows that the Democratic majority in Congress could be in more jeopardy than ever. Here to debate all that this morning, our dueling strategists, James Carville for the Democrats. Bay Buchanan for the Republicans. Welcome to you both. And let me start out with that poll in the Wall Street Journal. It shows that when voters look ahead to the November midterm election, they're split over whether or not they want Democrats or Republicans to control the Congress. 44 to 44. But, then you dig into it and say when you just talk to the voters most likely to show up at the polls in November, a huge, huge advantage for the Republicans. 56 for the Republicans. Only 36 for Democrats. James Carville, this is the worst warning sign yet for the Democrats.

JAMES CARVILLE (ABC News contributor): It's not good. And we've consistently shown that in our Democracy Corp polling. There's some evidence that this gap is starting to tighten slightly. But it's going to have to do more than slightly. In the 2012 election, we would do better. But we have to run this in 2010. And the Democrats need a strategy to re-energize some of their voters. This finding is very consistent and very true with other things that I've seen.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Bay, Karl Rove writes in the Wall Street Journal today that this could be an epic election for the Republicans.

BAY BUCHANAN (Conservative activist): Yeah. I think there is a real problem. I agree with James, no question. But, I'd like to tell you it's all pro-Republican and they want to come our way. But it's really an anti-incumbency, anti-Washington. And that's the Democrats are going to go against what the Democrats have done in the last couple years. And so, Republicans are going to benefit. I'm just hoping that those who do benefit, those Republicans are new, fresh faces and not part of our old establishment. Because America is not interested in bringing back what we gave them for eight years. They want new faces, new energy, new leadership in this country.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And, of course, Bay, to prove your point, the republican incumbent in Utah, lost his primary, Bob Bennett over the weekend, to a tea party activist. James Carville, you talk about the Democratic strategy to limit losses. You know, you've seen over the last month health care passes. Jobs are being created. The President has an arms control agreement with the Russians. Yet, nothing seems to move these numbers.

CARVILLE: Well, I think the White House is acutely aware of that. As are other Democratic strategists. I mean, the hope is that job numbers continue to come in at an impressive rate and it starts to. And that's a possibility and one that Democrats have to hold out hope for. And also, that as election day gets closer, that 39 percent of the Democrats are energized as opposed to 56 percent of the Republicans, that that number begins to close. And if that happens, than you can avoid catastrophic losses. But right now, I don't think in fairness, truthfully, you can say the election were held today, we would be faced with that. Democrats would be faced with some staggering losses.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Losing control?

CARVILLE: Oh, yeah. Absolutely possible. If the election were today. But it's not. And the chances that that number closes are much better than it stays open. And the effect of continued job numbers is going to have some effect on the political atmosphere, at least I hope.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's turn-

BUCHANAN: George, George, I think there's a real problem here for Democrats, because what's motivating the voters is this huge debt that we have. This increasing deficit. The incredible unwillingness for Washington to get control over spending. It's outrageous. And people are unnerved by it, as they pull in their belt in communities and states are pulling in theirs. Washington just keeps spending. As if that's the only solution. You can't solve that in the next six months. And I think that's why the voters are going to come to the ballot and say get rid of these guys and bring in somebody who will get control.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's turn to Elena Kagan, the President's nominee for the supreme court. She was making courtesy calls on yesterday. Here she is with Republican Orrin Hatch. Actually, that's-

[Clip of Kagan in Hatch's office]

ELENA KAGAN: It's great to be here. It's a beautiful office.

ORRIN HATCH: You know, there's some nice stuff here. You're going to get mad. There's a Man of the Year for the National Rifle Association. It's a place of art, really.

KAGAN: It's beautiful.

HATCH: It's a handmade flint lock and it's beautiful, beautiful.

KAGAN: It's gorgeous.

[Clip ends]

STEPHANOPOULOS: She's not going to say anything to hurt her chances. But, you know, the White House has this 48-hour rule, saying that the nominations are won and loss in the first 48 hours. Is this one already over?

CARVILLE: This one? Yeah. Barring something that no one's foreseen, I don't think there's a person in the world who would think there's any chance of derailing this nomination. Actually, they might not be too nice to him. They might boo him at some tea party here and there.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Bay?

BUCHANAN: There's no question, George, she'll be confirmed, in my opinion. But the key is, I don't understand for the life of me, why when the left has control of the Senate, as they do, that obama would not put up one of the best and the brightest. This woman is not one of the finest, you know, liberal judicial minds in the country. She doesn't have any kind of record. She has the blank slate. And she's like a Harriet Miers with a Harvard twist here. You know? I don't understand why they don't get the best and the brightest and fight for one of their Scalias. But, they don't.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I think you'll find- We're out of time. I think you'll find a lot of Democrats debate that point.

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

MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Derides Obama for 'Going Overboard' With 'Pseudo' Kagan Interview

 

View the Video Here

MSNBC reporter Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday actually expressed some journalistic outrage over a White House PR video disguised as an interview, deriding the administration for "crossing a number of lines when it comes to journalism." An irritated Mitchell highlighted a video on the White House website that features Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. [Audio available here.]

Most other media outlets have ignored this story. Mitchell, however, complained to reporter Kelly O'Donnell: "But, the White House has gone overboard, I think some would suggest, in terms of the control of all of this."

Attacking the "pseudo interview," Mitchell mocked, "Doesn't this seem to you like they are really crossing a number of lines here when it comes to journalism and the proper approach to selling a justice?"

Reporter Kelly O'Donnell explained the video: "It appears like an interview. But, people who are watching it should know that it was produced and done completely by the White House." Emphasizing the point, she repeated, "[Kagan] talks about her work in law school, her love of the law. Things that are certainly glossy and friendly. But it is not an interview."

Mitchell closed by proclaiming, "[The White House video is] certainly a big issue for journalists." But, is it? Who else will cover this?

CBS's Early Show hasn't discussed this latest video, but, on August 3, 2009, touted an earlier Obama PR package. The MRC's Kyle Drennen explained:

At the top of Monday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith touted a White House-produced video: "And your letters to the President...A behind-the-scenes look at how President Obama keeps in touch with everyday Americans." After airing the administration spin, co-host Maggie Rodriguez argued it was "all part of Obama's promise of transparency in the people's White House."

A transcript of the February 12 segment, which aired at 1:02pm EDT, follows:

ANDREA MITCHELL: Elena Kagan is making the rounds on Capitol Hill, meeting with key senators. NBC's Capitol Hill correspondent Kelly O'Donnell joining us live. Big meetings today. What's the sense, the mood as she has her first meetings with key members of the Judiciary Committee and others?

KELLY O'DONNELL: Well, it's getting to know you day, Andrea. Elena Kagan is stopping at leadership. She's had a couple meetings so far. She'll be at this all day, really, until the early evening hours to meet these senators and to get a sense of what they may be wanting to know from her. And, of course, for senators it's a chance to get a sense of who she is as a person, talk about issues that may come up during this process. A lot of it is really an opportunity to just sort of spend a few minutes together in private meetings, not the big public Q and A that will come at the hearing. So, that's sort of where we are right now. From Republicans you're getting a real sense of wanting everything to slow down a bit. They are using words like "thorough" for the process they want to go through. Meaning it will be tough. It will be as intense as they can make it knowing they do not have the numbers to really derail this confirmation. And barring any big surprise, most people believe she will be able to be confirmed. But, between now and then, there's a lot that has to be done. She has a big questionnaire to fill out, which is everything about her public life and even professional life, personal life in terms of financial statements. So, a lot of that is going on now. Today is just a way to simply begin that process. And for us it's a chance to see her interacting with people who will decide if she becomes the 112th justice. Andrea?

MITCHELL: Well, off course as they go through all of this process, nominees have never submitted themselves to interviews. That's been a routine. They don't submit themselves to interviews before they go through confirmation. But, the White House has gone overboard, I think some would suggest, in terms of the control of all of this. They've posted a, a sort of, pseudo interview on their website. And it appears she is speaking in her own words, being interviewed. And it turns out that the interviewer is not a journalist, it's a White House staff member. Doesn't this seem to you like they are really crossing a number of lines here when it comes to journalism and the proper approach to selling a justice?

O'DONNELL: Well, this White House has always tried to sort of leap over reporters to a large extent and photographers as well, to communicate directly with those people who would be in the public who will click on their website and want to learn more about her. It appears like an interview. But, people who are watching it should know that it was produced and done completely by the White House. And that means it will only deal with things that they believe are favorable and contribute to the narrative of who is Elena Kagan? What's her background? She talks about her childhood. She talks about her work in law school, her love of the law. Things that are certainly glossy and friendly. But it is not an interview. And as you point out, typically justices do not do interviews. It's rare. It does happen, but it's rare. And so these behind the scenes meetings are a chance for real questions and answers. And unlike Sonia Sotomayor, who chatted a bit as she walked around the Senate last year, so far Elena Kagan has just said hello. No chance for reporters to interact. And so, that debate of how far does the White House go in its packaging is really a lively one that deals with lots of issues and certainly now with the Supreme Court nominee.

MITCHELL: It's certainly big issues for journalists.

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