Dems To Cut Deficit

Folks also think President Bush will veto any tax hike legislation that
a new Democratic Congress might pass. Yes, yes, I believe Bush would
definitely veto a direct tax hike bill. But the political story will be
much more complicated than this...

This means that Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Rangel, John
Spratt and other Dems would be able to craft a so-called big bang
deficit reduction package that would (falsely) cobble together spending
cuts with tax revenue hikes.

President Bush might eventually be confronted with a Hobbesian
choice of vetoing a so-called $500 billion dollar deficit reduction
package that would overturn and rollback cap gains, dividends and the
top income tax rate...

In an interview with President George W. Bush conducted in North Carolina and excerpted on Wednesday's World News on ABC, George Stephanopoulos quoted to Bush how he once declared that the upcoming election is “a choice between Republicans and Democrats who want to wave the white flag of surrender in the war on terror.” Stephanopoulos then demanded: “Can you name a Democrat who wants to 'wave the white flag of surrender'?" Referring to Senator John Kerry, Bush replied: "I can name a Democrat who said there ought to be a date certain from which to withdraw from Iraq, whether or not we've achieved a victory or not-" An astounded Stephanopoulos asked: "That's surrender?" Bush countered: "Yeah it is, if you pull the troops out before the job is done." To which Stephanopoulos suggested a nefarious motive: "So you don't think that's questioning their patriotism when you say that?" Bush rejected the notion: "No, I know it's not questioning their patriotism. I think it's questioning their judgment."

Video clip (30 seconds): Real (900 KB) or Windows Media (1.1 MB), plus MP3 audio (175 KB)

Today on CNN's "The Situation Room," homeland security correspondent Jeanne Meserve reported:

"This was a threat that appeared on a Web site. It said that dirty bombs would be detonated this Sunday outside NFL games in seven U.S. cities: Miami, New York, Atlanta, Seattle, Houston, Oakland, and Cleveland.

"The Department of Homeland Security is saying there is no credible intelligence to support these claims, no credible information to indicate such attacks will take place. But, out of an abundance of caution, they informed the NFL and other officials, so they can take the actions that they deem to be appropriate."

Despite DHS's statement, CNN political analyst and Clinton boot licker Paul Begala was quick to suggest a conspiracy:

On the October 18 edition of "The Situation Room," CNN host Jack Cafferty wondered about the possibility of an October surprise to save the Republicans in the midterm elections. He noted that "many people think Karl Rove would be the architect" behind such an event. Cafferty, who made the comments during the 5:15p.m. segment of ‘The Cafferty File,’ speculated that such a surprise could include finding Osama bin Laden. The CNN host then noted ominously:

Jack Cafferty: "It just so happens, Rove told ‘The Washington Times’ he’s confident the Republicans will keep control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives. He says, ‘the Foley matter,’ his words, will have impact in some limited districts, but not overall. Perhaps Mr. Rove knows something we don’t."

In an article in today's Washington Times, Karl Rove predicts the Republicans will hold onto both the House and the Senate. He also derided media coverage that predicted a Democratic victory.

In the hourlong interview, Mr. Rove was upbeat, telling stories from the campaign trail and joking about skewed political coverage that disproportionately shows Democrats poised to take control of Congress...

"This morning, I loved it: The [Associated Press] ran a story saying these Democrat congressional candidates outraised their Republican incumbents in the third quarter. Well, what they didn't say was that part of the reason that they did is that we raised the money earlier so that we'd be able to deploy it," he said.

Perpetually last placed news channel MSNBC is rumored to face massive layoffs and see its headquarters moved from New Jersey to New York, where the rest of NBC operates. Says Gawker:

It's that time again where we float a rumor currently making the rounds and ask you to do our work for us: We're hearing that NBC is about to get a lot lighter, employee-wise. Some of what we've been told involves massive layoffs at MSNBC, with the remaining crew moving from Secaucus to 30 Rock (which means, at least, that MSNBC head Dan Ambrams will be able to have lunch with his pal Dave Zinczenko a bit more often). Fishbowl DC reports that Jeff Zucker (who will surely keep his job, what with the excellent work he's been doing lately) will announce the firings tomorrow; let's see if we can't get a little more information before then. Confidential memos or scurrilous gossip here.

What a difference a day makes!  Just yesterday, as I reported here, pollster John Zogby was boasting of his affiliation with Nova M, the new liberal radio network, heir to the moribund Air America.  The headline of the mass email he sent out proclaimed: "Air America Co-Founders Start New Liberal Talk Network: Mike Malloy, Joe Trippi and John Zogby join Nova M Radio."

As he breathlessly announced the "formation of [the] new progressive talk radio network" by a couple of Air America's original founders, Zogby touted his own connection, letting us know that he will be co-hosting a weekly one hour show, “The Pulse of the Nation.” The idea will be for Zogby to "poll particular hot button issues from politics and pop culture to the War in Iraq and stem cell research. Each program will include expert guests and audience participation. At the end of each show John will reveal the secret results of the poll and each listener will then know whether or not they have their finger on 'The Pulse of the Nation!'"

After nearly three weeks of covering every aspect of the Mark Foley scandal, CNN’s "American Morning" still hasn’t tired of the story. Wednesday’s edition of the program featured over 18 minutes of coverage. This encompassed seven full reports on the disgraced Congressman and one anchor read. In contrast, there were no reports on the unfolding controversy of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, and his questionable land deal. Additionally, the October 18 "American Morning" featured only two brief anchor reads on a racially charged remark made by Democratic House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer.

"American Morning" has actually increased their Foley coverage over a similar analysis last week. On October 12, the program devoted 18 minutes and 4 seconds to the story. Today, the scandal received 18 minutes and 19 seconds. There’s an important difference however: Starting October 16, "American Morning" shrank from four hours to three. In other words, the show allocated more time to the story, and they did it with a shorter program.

As reported earlier here on Newsbusters, Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly appeared on Wednesday’s edition of 'The View' to promote his new book Culture Warrior. As one would expect, O’Reilly and liberal 'View' co-host Rosie O’Donnell clashed at several points during the segment, particularly in their discussion of the war in Iraq. O’Donnell would go on in the interview to praise the ACLU as a "fantastic organization" and express her appreciation for liberal Phil Donahue:

Barbara Walters: "Name some well-known secular progressives."

Bill O’Reilly: "All right. George Soros is the money man...The ACLU is the vanguard–"

Rosie O’Donnell: "The American Civil Liberties Union, a fantastic organization."

It is Wednesday, which means it was time for another installment of "Capitol Bob," Bob Schieffer; on CBS’ "Early Show." Today’s segment dealt with the midterm elections and Schieffer’s predictions. Schieffer still believes the Democrats will win control of the House, but cautioned Democrats not to get too over confident, as there are three weeks to go and the Republicans have a tremendous fund-raising edge. And in fact, the cash advantage was the only positive sign Schieffer could see for Republicans. Co-host Rene Syler, however, highlighted that with the Mark Foley coverage subsiding, experts were a little more skeptical of the Democrats chances. Syler introduced the segment:

"For weeks now, negative news from Washington left the Republican party sagging. But, now that it's gotten quieter, the GOP is ready to fight for control of the next Congress. And of course, for the inside scoop from Washington we turn to 'Capitol Bob,' CBS News Chief Washington correspondent and host of 'Face the Nation,' Bob Schieffer. Bob, good morning."

As I mentioned last week, CBS was pushing the notion that the Bush administration ought to kowtow to North Korean demands and agree to bilateral talks. This theme was again highlighted on Wednesday’s "Early Show" by co-host Harry Smith. Smith had the opportunity to speak with Wendy Sherman, President Clinton’s former North Korea adviser, and while he noted that people like former Democratic Senator Sam Nunn, whom Smith describes as "a very wise guy about this stuff," think we should talk directly with the North Korean regime, he omitted any questions about Ms. Sherman’s role in the Clinton administration and its failed polices regarding North Korea. At the end of the 7:00 half hour, Smith inquired:

It seems that some suspected Taliban fighters have recently been released by the U.S. Military from Guantanamo Bay, because they were arrested based upon some false information. MSNBC, never one to miss a chance to swipe at our fighting men and women, began a weep-fest for the freed prisoners. http://www.msnbc.msn... At this ceremony, held by Afghan authorities for the release of the prisoners, one Sayed Mohammad Ali Shah, a doctor, made a startling revelation. He claimed that while living in his home country of Afghanistan he may have been "persecuted physically, but at Guantanamo we were persecuted mentally.” It is the MSM's goal for you to feel sorry for these former detainees. First off, the liberal media needs to remember that 90% of these prisoners are captured on the battle field.

Over at the MRC's BusinessandMedia.org Web site, I wrote today about how CNN's Bill Schneider and Miles O'Brien admit that the economy is doing just fine, although polls show people think it isn't all that hot.

But rather than analyze economic trends in historical context, CNN used the opportunity to plug Lou Dobbs's special "War on the Middle Class."

At no point, however, did O’Brien or Schneider tell viewers that Dobbs’s special, and his book by the same title, represent Dobbs’s opinion, not objective reporting.

Indeed, one of the sponsors of Dobbs’s special, the American Association of Retired Persons is a liberal public policy advocate that lobbies the government to spend more taxpayer dollars on Medicare and other social programs. The AARP also played a key role in opposing President Bush’s plans to partially privatize Social Security in 2005.

The Washington Post noticed today that Rep. Steny Hoyer made a racial boo-boo on Sunday, that black Republican Senate candidate Michael Steele has "a career of slavishly supporting the Republican Party." In 2002, Hoyer denounced Steele as a "token." Did the Post paste it at the top of the front page? No, it’s on B-2. It’s a lot different than the long-running, transparently partisan "Macaca" campaign waged by Michael Shear, Tim Craig and the rest of the Post against Sen. George Allen. (Today’s Nexis count: 92 Post articles, news and editorial, with the word "Macaca." Four of them were news accounts on the front page.)

Ann Marimow’s story couldn’t match the Shear & Craig treatment. Where they dropped "Macaca" in every story they could work it in, Marimow did not remind the Post reader that Steele’s Democratic Senate opponent, Rep. Ben Cardin, fired a junior staffer for blogging about being a "sex object" for Cardin's Jewish friends and alleged that the attempted discipline of a black campaign staffer failed because "he plays the racism card, the magic passport to a different chain of command." (The Post reported the firing on September 15, and Marimow mentioned it vaguely on October 4. That’s about 92 to 2.)

I am always thinking of better ways to accomplish things and always finding ways to help even my own community in need. And I think about all the chaos in the world today. I do find it sad that in today’s world that some people want to live in the past as far as politics and war. No one likes war but there is always going to be some sort of war regardless of what it is to try to keep the peace as ironic as that sounds because ther eis always someone out there putting a glitch into it. But while during a time of war one would think we would do everything humanly possible to make things smoother and help one another. But instead there are some people determined to fight, argue and spend their time doing the evil duty of infecting us with the utmost negativity as possible and cause nothing but chaos.

One of the continual carps of the media concerning the current economic expansion has been that only low-paying jobs are being created that aren’t keeping up with inflation. Well, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Wednesday:

Average weekly earnings rose by 4.0 percent, seasonally adjusted, from September 2005 to September 2006.  After deflation by the CPI-W, average weekly earnings increased by 2.2 percent.  Before adjustment for seasonal change and inflation, average weekly earnings were $571.89 in September 2006, compared with $549.86 a year earlier.

One would expect this to be welcome news to Americans. Alas, it is unlikely they will hear about it, because the media don’t report economic data that go counter to their view of the world.

Quite the contrary, as reported by the Business & Media Institute, when positive news about inflation-adjusted earnings was released by the Census Bureau in August, the press largely ignored it. CNN’s Soledad O’Brien even reported the exact opposite finding in a September 4 interview with Labor Secretary Elaine Chao:

Bill O'Reilly was on The View today to discuss his new book Culture Warrior and, although there weren't fireworks, he and co-host Rosie O'Donnell got into a heated exchange about the war in Iraq. O'Reilly pressed O'Donnell with the question of whether she wanted the US to win in Iraq. Rosie refused to answer. She said she doesn't think it's possible. She wants America to be what "the founding fathers wanted it to be." But she wouldn't say that she wanted the US to win in Iraq. According to Rosie, wanting the US to win in Iraq is "antiquated thinking."

Video available here.

Some people still think of the Chicago Tribune as the voice of conservative Republicanism. The truth is that it hasn't been for many years.

Today's editorial endorsements by the newspaper provide fresh evidence of how the once mighty Tribune has fallen. The Tribune endorsed seven Illinois candidates for Congress; every one of them is a liberal Democrat.

Moreover, the incumbent Democrats the Tribune recommends include some of the most liberal representatives in Congress:

Bobby Rush, according to the nonpartisan National Journal, in 2005 voted more liberal on social policy issues than 96 percent of the Representatives.

Jesse Jackson, Jr., according to the same index, in 2005 voted more liberal on social policy issues than 86 percent of his colleagues.

CNN's crusty "Situation Room" commentator Jack Cafferty appeared (again) on the leftist, Bush-bashing Stephanie Miller radio show Wednesday morning, promoting his upcoming special tomorrow night on "Broken Government." While he began by trying to be nonpartisan, and mentioning the Harry Reid financial non-disclosure, that Democrats are just a "different breed of weasel," he did end up sounding rather liberal in spots. Miller argued that votes aren't being counted because of President Clinton's mantra "when people vote, Democrats win." Cafferty replied that if people don't feel their votes are counted, then "this democracy's gone. We're trying to bring democracy to Iraq. Hell, we couldn't even bring it to Ohio." He sounds like Keith Olbermann, obsessing about Bush winning by "only" 120,000 votes in 2004.

I don’t know about you, but I love it when a liberal member of Congress tries to talk tough about terrorism. It’s kind of like watching my 13-year-old daughter try to bully my 18-year-old son. Such was the case on the “O’Reilly Factor” last night when Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) tried to look tough in front of Our Boy Bill – sorry for the “Carousel” pun to those who caught it (hat tip to Hot Air with video link to follow).

The scrum started early when O’Reilly brought up the Military Commissions Act just signed by the President, and the fact that Rangel voted against it. Charlie weakly replied: “Not only is the bill unconstitutional, but it was brought up on the eve of an election to give some type of feeling that Republicans were tough on terrorism.”

Rangel stepped into an uppercut with that offering, and O’Reilly didn’t miss the opportunity:

Talk amongst yourselves...

If you're looking for some fair-and-balanced commentary on the situation in Iraq, there's nothing like relying exclusively on a scholar with two degrees from Berkeley - particularly if that same person is a frequent NPR guest.

That was Good Morning America's approach this morning. The only expert invited to comment on the situation in Iraq was Shibley Telhami of the Brookings Institution. Predictably, he painted matters in the bleakest possible light:

"I believe that the United States has lost the ability to control events in Iraq. And it lost them long ago."

A quick Googling reveals that Telhami has both a doctorate and masters from Berkeley. He was an undergrad at Queens College in NYC, another liberal hotbed. According to his Wikipedia entry, Telhami was born into an Arab family in Israel and is a regular guest on NPR.

It’s always amusing to see media code words and phrases that seem to say one thing but, upon reflection, end up meaning less than at first thought. Phrases like "sources say" would lead one to imagine whole rafts of insiders are affirming a story's bias when really it is just one disgruntled person as the "source", or words like "many" when it is but a very few are used all the time to inflate the importance of a reporter's bias or justify his story.

The L.A. Times used a classic today in the story titled "Some See 'Pink Purge' in the GOP". Notice the word "some"? What exactly does "some" mean? According to the story "some" seems to be the thought of many Christian Republicans.