Hyperbolic claims about the Tea Party are nothing new from the mainstream media, but now admitted plagiarist Fareed Zakaria is comparing the conservative group to a radical Islamist sect, rehashing the same tired comparison other liberal journalists and pundits have made before.
On the June 29 edition of Fareed Zakaria GPS, the host compared the Tea Party to the Mahdi Army, an Iraqi Shiite paramilitary force that is opposed to both the Maliki regime and the radical Sunni group ISIS [MP3 audio here; video below]:
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and that company's argument for religious freedom. CNN’s Carol Costello wondered if the decision will now allow for “religion to make decisions over science.”
Joined by a panel of several guests to discuss the coming ruling on CNN Newsroom, host Carol Costello was more concerned with the impact the Supreme Court ruling would have on science rather than constitutionality.
Hank Paulson, whose claim to fame in the public sector is panicking and browbeating the nation and its Washington politicians into accepting the Troubled Asset Relief Program in late September 2008, and who just two weeks later "put a (figurative) gun to the heads" of large-bank CEOs to "persuade" them to accept federal "investment" in their enterprises, has re-emerged to tell us, according to the Hill, that "Republicans are 'ready for a serious discussion' on climate change."
As a reminder, in 2007, the late Robert Novak wrote that Paulson "contributed to Bill Clinton in 1992, Democrat Bill Bradley's 2000 presidential campaign, the feminist Emily's List and Wall Street's favorite Democrat, Chuck Schumer," before financially supporting George W. Bush in 2004. Paulson was also "regarded in his own administration as less a true Republican secretary than a transition to the next Democratic Treasury." One of Paulson's current assertions parrots global warming alarmists' claims in mid-May that that a serious and supposedly irreversible collapse of Antarctic Sea ice will catastrophically raise worldwide sea levels. Over the weekend, meteorologist Joe Bastardi, Chief Forecaster at WeatherBell Analytics LLC, relayed some very inconvenient data (bolds are mine):
An undated but clearly recent page at the National Wildlife Federation breathlessly warns readers, in a section entitled "Threats from Global Warming," that "Lake Erie water levels, already below average, could drop 4-5 feet by the end of this century, significantly altering shoreline habitat." A Thursday Huffington Post Canada Business entry observed that "the (Great Lakes) basin has experienced the longest extended period of lower water levels since the U.S. and Canada began tracking levels in 1918." Of course, it's because of "climate change."
Friday, Julie Bosman at the New York Times reported (HT Powerline) that "The International Joint Commission, a group with members from the United States and Canada that advises on water resources, completed a five-year study in April 2013 concluding that water levels in the lakes were likely to drop even farther, in part because of the lack of precipitation in recent years brought on by climate change." But the reason Bosman was on the story is because — fortunately for area residents, but unfortunately for "startled" global warming adherents claiming to be "scientists" — Great Lakes sea levels are rising again (bolds are mine throughout this post):
Hobby Lobby's objection on religious grounds to paying for abortion-causing contraceptives for its employees reminds Eugene Robinson of segregationists who cited the Bible in support of their views. In his great magnimity, Robinson allowed that the Hobby Lobby case "is perhaps a bit different." But if the WaPo columnist didn't think the segregation analogy were relevant, he presumably wouldn't have cited it in the first place on today's Morning Joe.
There was also a point of light on the show. Donny Deutsch, after announcing that he was "far from a conservative," nevertheless went on to make the explicitly free-market argument that "nobody is forcing anybody to work at Hobby Lobby." View the video after the jump.
If only there were an Obama scandal for journalists to cover.
Almost exactly two years after the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank ludicrously claimed “the media would love to have an Obama scandal to cover,” on Sunday’s MediaBuzz on FNC, veteran DC journalist Julie Mason encapsulated the attitude of the Washington press corps which has little interest in the IRS scandal, insisting that “every journalist in town would love if there was proof of a scandal, they would be galloping after it.”
After Friday's World News on ABC ignored the White House report on the infamous problems with the Department of Veterans Affairs, Saturday's Good Morning America on ABC also ignored the scandal, while CBS This Morning Saturday and NBC's Today show -- both of which are two-hour programs - only ran short briefs, the one on CBS totaling 25 seconds and the one on NBC 19 seconds.
By contrast, the CBS Evening News on Friday led with the V.A. story and gave it a full report of more than two minutes. The NBC Nightly News, after initially giving the story 24 seconds on Friday, followed up Saturday evening and presented viewers a full report of almost two and a half minutes, making it the second story both evenings.
NBC’s Cynthia McFadden did what she does best during an interview with Valerie Jarrett, senior advisor to President Obama, lobby for Hillary Clinton to run for president.
Appearing during a taped interview that aired on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday, June 29, McFadden hyped how “There's no question that the person who is poised at this moment to break that ultimate glass ceiling is Hillary Clinton.” [See video below.]
Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the far-left The Nation magazine, did her best to attack Bill Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard magazine, over his continued support for the Iraq war and the need to take action to stop the increasing violence in the region.
Appearing on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, June 29, vanden Heuvel tried to verbally assault Kristol by asserting “We don't need armchair warriors. And if you feel so strongly, you should, with all due respect, enlist in the Iraqi army.”
NBC’s David Gregory did his best to minimize Speaker of the House John Boehner’s soon-to-be lawsuit against President Obama, dismissing it as a “political stunt.”
During an interview with Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, on Meet the Press on Sunday, June 29, Gregory insisted that the lawsuit had no real merit and wondered “isn’t this just to gin up the base in the midterms?” [See video below.]
Imagine if in America there were a coal mining magnate as famous as Donald Trump who was the founder of a political party named after himself (Trump United Party?). In addition, this well known person would be strongly opposed to a carbon tax. Obviously such a person would be considered an enemy by environmentalists. Well, think of the shock if none other than Al Gore held a friendly joint press conference with such a person. Many would suspect that money was the motive for such a strange alliance.
Guess what? Something like this happened last week in Australia where Al Gore appeared with Australian mining magnate Clive Palmer at a press conference. Although Palmer, a founder of the Palmer United Party in Australia, opposed the soon to be repealed carbon tax, Al Gore suddenly and mysteriously found common ground with him. Naturally the Australian press found Gore's new-found friendship quite suspicious. First we have a report from Annabel Crabb of The Age in Australia at the shock of the people there at seeing Gore and Palmer together on stage:
Former Washington Post reporter Ruth Marcus grew distraught over how Hillary Clinton is blowing it a Sunday column titled "More money, more problems." She began: "Dear Secretary Clinton, Please consider this in the nature of a friendly intervention. You have a money problem. It’s time to deal with it before it gets worse." She repeats that twice with greater and greater emphasis.
"The issue isn’t that you’re rich, or even that you and your husband became rich after leaving office," it's that Hillary is both greedy and whiny:
From the end of Wednesday’s Special Report with Bret Baier on the Fox News Channel, a condensed version of Jon Stewart’s “poor-off” between Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, a comedy bit from the June 24 Daily Show on Comedy Central.
In the Friday PBS NewsHour,anchor Judy Woodruff lamented the current impasse in Washington: "I don’t know what else to call it, war between congressional Republicans and the president."
She sounded shocked that Speaker John Boehner filed suit to protest the president's constant end-runs around Congress and legislating from the White House on Obamacare, immigration, and other issues. Shields called the suit "absolutely bogus" and compared it to impeaching Bill Clinton in 1998:
On NPR’s Morning Edition, anchor Steve Inskeep announced “It's Friday morning, which is when we hear from StoryCorps, which is marking the anniversary of a pivotal moment for gay rights -- the 1969 Stonewall riots – 45 years ago tomorrow, gay protesters clashed with police in New York. Now StoryCorps is launching an initiative to preserve the stories of LGBT people, which is called OutLoud.”
Inskeep turned to the testimony of a seventy-year old homosexual named Patrick Haggerty, who told a story about how he went to high school in rural Washington state with glitter on his face, and his father came to school in dirty farmer clothes. The father was hailed by the son: “I had the patron saint of dads for sissies.”
Last fall, not long after the federal government’s partial shutdown ended, The New Yorker’s David Denby alleged that shutdown point man Ted Cruz seemed to be pursuing the presidency “by sowing as much confusion and disorder as possible—playing the joker in a seemingly nihilistic charade whose actual intent is a rational grab for power.”
There’s nothing as pointed or nasty as that in “The Absolutist,” Jeffrey Toobin’s 8,400-word New Yorker profile of Cruz, but Toobin does paint Cruz as an extremist – more of a Goldwater figure than a Reagan figure – as well as a hypocrite regarding judicial activism.
To borrow from the Bill Clinton mantra per James Carville in 1992 (“It’s the economy, stupid”), America’s increasing landslide of crises foreign and domestic comes from a very simple understanding of what’s at play: It’s the ideology, stupid.
The other night, Bill O’Reilly had an interesting segment that he titled: “Were the conservative radio talk show hosts correct?” To wax Carvillian, O’Reilly’s conclusion was that, well, yes, they were kinda sorta correct because: It’s the competence, stupid.
In a Thursday evening writeup about how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will allow a California wind farm to "become the first in the nation to avoid prosecution if eagles are injured or die when they run into the giant turning blades," reporter Scott Smith at the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, took a big gulp of his hi-test White House koolaid, and wrote: "Under President Barack Obama, wind energy has exploded as a pollution-free energy source that can help reduce the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming."
Graphic novelist Max Brooks, a former writer for Saturday Night Live, charged on Friday night’s Real Time with Bill Maher that Tea Party “ideologues” are just like the Nazi “ideologues” who fooled the German elite in the decades before World War II.
There’s a new card game making the rounds that’s designed to offend. What does it say about our culture that this marketing strategy actually works?
“Cards Against Humanity is a party game for horrible people,” reads the game’s website. “Unlike most of the party games you’ve played before, Cards Against Humanity is as despicable and awkward as you and your friends.”
During the Wednesday evening episode of The O'Reilly Factor, Fox News Channel host Bill O'Reilly slammed conservative activist Jason Mattera's “ambush journalism” of former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, calling it “unacceptable” to use “a horrendous act of terror to make a political point.”
After Martha MacCallum, another Fox anchor, appeared in the segment and agreed with O'Reilly. Mattera tweeted: “Rather than invite me to debate the Hillary video, @oreillyfactor brings on someone else to parrot his points. Yeah, 'fair and balanced.'"
Math is hard over at the Department of Labor these days, pretty much from top to bottom. Last Friday, the DOL listed what it says were the 31 states which showed "statistically significant" job growth in the 12 months ended in May. It turns out that six other states should have been on that list, dropping Ohio, which was the slowest-growing among those originally listed, from number 31 to 37.
Labor Secretary Thomas Perez, and apparently the rest of the country, has a really big problem. He claims that his department has trained 84 million workers during the past six years, yet millions and millions of Americans are somehow still unemployed. The opening portions of a speech Perez made on July 19 at the National Fund for Workforce Solutions Annual Meeting follow the jump (HT to a frequent emailer; bolds are mine throughout this post):
Friday's World News on ABC glossed over the release of Deputy White House Chief of Staff Rob Nabors's report on the scandal at the Veterans Administration. President Obama had sent Nabors to look into the long wait times at veterans hospitals nationwide. Instead, the evening newscast set aside almost two minutes of air time to a woman, who is eight months pregnant, competing in a track and field competition.
On CBS Evening News, Scott Pelley led the broadcast with the "bleak picture" detailed in the new report. Correspondent Wyatt Andrews spotlighted how Nabors "combined scathing criticism with ideas on moving the V.A. forward." Brian Williams used the same label as Andrews during his 24-second news brief about the story on NBC Nightly News: [MP3 audio available here; video below the jump]
In an exercise supposedly "aimed at understanding the nature and scope of political polarization in the American public, and how it interrelates with government, society and people’s personal lives," the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has published a 185-page report containing some of the most ridiculous either/or questions I have ever seen in a polling effort. Its mission seems to be to demonize anyone who believes that government aren't particularly good or effective at what they do, and anyone who thinks there are limits on what it can or should do.
One of the most egregious pieces of either/or nonsense caught the attention of liberal-leaning blogger and law professor Ann Althouse. Participants had to choose between the following two statements: "Poor people have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything," or "Poor people have hard lives because government benefits don't go far enough to help them live decently." Pew, which divided voters into different "typologies," reports that a combined 80-plus percent of those who it typed as "conservative went with the "have it easy" choice.
People who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid known as global warming-climate change are not just "deniers"; we are guilty of a "nihilistic refusal" to address the issue. So says a Washington Post editorial commenting favorably on Monday'sSupreme Court ruling that allows theEnvironmental Protection Agency, under certain limits, to proceed under the Clean Air Act to regulate major sources of greenhouse-gas emissions.
The actual nihilists are those who refuse to accept any scientific information that undermines their claim that the globe is warming and humans are responsible for it. Cults are like that. Regardless of evidence contradicting their beliefs, cultists persist in blind faith.
There’s a saying that “life isn’t one damn thing after another – it’s the same damn thing over and over again.” That’s essentially what Steve Benen, a producer for MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show,” argued regarding the IRS scandal in a Thursday blog post on the “TRMS” website.
Benen claimed that throughout “the imaginary IRS ‘scandal,’ there’s [been] an interesting pattern of events that serves as a template for every development. It starts with an alarming report, which is followed by scrutiny, which leads to details that make the original report appear meaningless.”
The New York Times's public editor on Friday responded to criticism about the paper's coverage of the IRS scandal, admitting: "The Times was somewhat late in beginning to cover the latest development about the lost emails." An analysis by the Media Research Center's Jeffrey Meyer on Thursday found that "in the past 6 months (183 days), the New York Times has published only 13 news items on the IRS’ targeting of Tea Party groups."
Public editor Margaret Sullivan questioned David Joachim, the Times's Washington-based reporter, on the scant coverage. He offered an equivalence that seemed dismissive of complaints: "One side sees a Nixonian abuse of power and cover-up; the other sees an effort to smear the White House for electoral gain in the midterms. That stuff brings out passions."
Reporting on yesterday's demise of New York City's jumbo-soda ban in New York State's Court of Appeals, the New York Times's Michael Grynbaum loaded his June 27 story with weighted language in favor of the vanquished side of the policy and legal arguments and presenting the fight as one between well-intentioned health advocates on one end and evil, greedy soda barons -- Big Fizz? -- on the other.
"The Bloomberg big-soda ban is officially dead," the Times staffer mourned in his lead sentence, adding (emphasis mine), "The state’s highest court on Thursday refused to reinstate New York City’s controversial limits on sales of jumbo sugary drinks, exhausting the city’s final appeal and dashing the hopes of health advocates who have urged state and local governments to curb the consumption of drinks and foods linked to obesity." By contrast, he noted "The ruling was a major victory for the American soft-drink industry, which had fought the plan." It was also a victory for the leave-me-the-hell-alone ethos of many a New Yorker who opposed the soda ban, but it seems Grynbaum failed to consult the proverbial man on the street by say hitting up a local bodega and asking the average customer for his or her thoughts.
Continuous fear-mongering from the left about the supposed cataclysmic dangers of global warming has always been present, but Slate’s Eric Holthaus has taken things to a whole different level. As Iraq and Syria devolve into chaos, the left-wing publication has blamed climate change for the rise of the al-Qaeda offshoot ISIS.
While the purpose of ISIS – imposing Sharia law on captured territory, ethnically cleansing Shia Muslims, and persecuting other religious groups like Christians – is evident to most of the world community, Slate makes the claim that the radical Sunni group was somehow spurred on by recent drought in the region: