Barbara Boxer

On Friday’s edition of MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, host Andrea Mitchell and ultra-liberal Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer actually compared Thursday's House hearing on contraception to the 1991 Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings. Mitchell linked the two, reminding that the Clarence Thomas hearing became "an earth-shattering moment on the Hill because it had been such a male institution for so long. That did become the year of the woman." [See video below. MP3 audio here.]

Boxer appeared on the show to express her anger that a Thursday hearing in the House on contraception and religious freedom included no female panelists in the first panel, going so far as to sneer that Republicans were "openly hostile towards women being respected and being able to choose their own health care options."

When it comes to culturally liberal policy positions, MSNBC has been repeatedly eager to portray conservatives as engaged in a "war on women" with Democrats and the Obama White House being the white knights riding to the defense of damsels in distress everywhere.

But when one program dared to deviate a little from the party line earlier this week to voice concerns about the Obama administration treading on religious liberties, it left a pair of liberal Democratic senators rather irate, reported BuzzFeed late Thursday evening:

After almost three weeks, CBS finally brought on a member of the Catholic hierarchy on Thursday's CBS This Morning to discuss the Obama administration health care mandate that forces Catholic institutions, like hospitals and colleges, to violate their consciences and pay for abortion-inducing drugs and contraception [audio clips available here; video clips below the jump]. On Good Morning America, ABC ignored the controversy for the second straight day.

It was also the second straight day that the CBS morning newscast brought on a Catholic cleric for his take about the prominent issue. By contrast, on Tuesday, NBC 's Today turned to their in-house radical feminist, Rachel Maddow, who blasted the completely warranted opposition to the new policy as a "pretty far-right perspective" and "an extension of anti-abortion politics."

 

News of the Komen Foundation's backpedaling regarding its grants to Planned Parenthood affiliates prompted liberal journalist Andrea Mitchell to do a victory lap on her 1 p.m. Eastern Andrea Mitchell Reports program today.

Mitchell began by noting that under "mounting pressure," Komen founder Nancy Brinker released an apology, an excerpt of which Mitchell read before interviewing pro-choice Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) by telephone about the development. [MP3 audio here; video follows page break]

MSNBC has been mocked as MS-DNC and MS-LSD by conservative critics. But given the network's constant drum-beat against the Komen Foundation for its decision to cut off grants to Planned Parenthood affiliates, it might be sensible to rename the liberal cable outlet MS-D&C, after the abortion procedure.

Throughout live coverage this morning and early afternoon, MSNBC hosts turned to pro-choice politicians and Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards to rebuke the breast cancer charity for its decision. Finally, in the 1 p.m. hour, veteran journalist and breast cancer patient Andrea Mitchell interviewed Komen's founder, Ambassador Nancy Brinker. Yet that discussion turned out to be a hardball interview that was followed immediately afterwards by a softball chat with hard-left U.S. senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

John H. Cushman, Jr. of the New York Times almost completely slanted to the left in his Friday article about the Obama administration's decision to force religious organizations to include free contraception in their employee insurance plans. Cushman quoted from HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, liberal Senator Barbara Boxer and the president of notorious pro-abortion "Catholics for Choice," but only included a six-word quote from the other side of the debate.

The writer led his post on the liberal paper's political blog, The Caucus, by noting that "the Obama administration said it would give religious organizations one additional year to comply with a new policy requiring employers to provide free contraception services in insurance plans. Roman Catholic bishops and other church leaders had protested the new rules, which were announced in August."

After Politico hysterically named Environmental Protection Agency chief Lisa Jackson its "Energy Policy Maker of the Year" Tuesday evening, NewsBusters sought the opinion of James Inhofe (R-Ok.), the ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

As readers would expect, this led to a lengthy discussion about the global warming myth, Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, ClimateGate, and a host of related subjects guaranteed to inform and entertain skeptics across the fruited plain (audio follows with transcript):

On Monday's Rick's List, CNN's Jessica Yellin leaned against California Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina as she compared one of her ads against that of her opponent, Senator Barbara Boxer. While Yellin acknowledged that Boxer's ad was "negative," she also  complimented it as "very effective." The correspondent went on to label Fiorina's commercial "mean" [audio clips available here].

Substitute anchor Brooke Baldwin discussed the California Senate race with Yellin 17 minutes into the 3 pm Eastern hour. Baldwin first noted that the San Francisco Chronicle declined to endorse either candidate in the race, for in their view, "[i]t is a dismal choice between an ineffective advocate for causes we generally support and a potentially strong advocate for positions we oppose." She then asked the correspondent, "[I]s that more of a slap in the face at Boxer or Fiorina?"

Yellin replied that it affected the Democrat more: "For Boxer, by far- I mean, it's fairly stunning that...a Democratic-leaning newspaper...their op-ed page tends to be left-leaning- would not endorse the long-term Democrat in the state is very, very bad for Barbara Boxer. I mean, their conclusion there is essentially that Boxer, they think, is ineffective. Carly Fiorina, they argue, is too conservative, so they're not endorsing."

In a zinger that roused the indignation of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Bloomberg columnist Margaret Carlson cast Christine O'Donnell as Sarah Palin's protege – but "with not a fully-functioning human brain." But in 1992, Carlson gushed over the primary victories of current Sens. Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein. Does she hold a double-standard?

Co-host Mika Brzezinski was taken aback when the panel had to discuss Carlson's piece for The Daily Beast, "Watch Your Back, Sarah." She silently mouthed the word "bitchy" to Carlson to describe the article, adding that it was "searing."

Carlson's piece focuses on the emergence of the Republican Delaware Senate nominee as the next Sarah Palin protege, predicting a political catfight of sorts between the two female GOP stars. Carlson labeled O'Donnell an "obvious knockoff" of Palin, "hawking her wares on the shores of the Delaware."

Appearing on "Morning Joe" Wednesday, Carlson sneered that O'Donnell lacks a "fully-functioning human brain."

Of course, there was a time when she smiled upon the emergence of female Senate candidates.

Chris Matthews this weekend winced in pain when a guest on his syndicated program said it's actually more likely the Democrats will lose the Senate than the House in the upcoming midterm elections.

As the "Chris Matthews Show" entered its final segment when panelists offer their predictions, New York magazine's John Heilemann said, "There are a lot of really smart Democratic politicos that I talk to who are actually a little bit more worried right now that it's possible Democrats could lose the Senate more easily than they could lose the House."

Matthews interrupted with a pained expression on his face, "That's like losing a dozen seats."

As Heilemann continued, the host once again interrupted, "Could [Sen. Barbara] Boxer lose in California?" 

When Heilemann said yes, Matthews grimaced, "You're talking tsunami" (video follows with transcript and commentary): 

At first blush, it seems as if this item might be one to file under "It Takes One to Know One." That would be wrong; the circumstances are too different.

Carly Fiorina took what she thought was a private swipe (which might not even have been a swipe at all, as noted at the end of this post) at Barbara "Don't Call Me Ma'am" Boxer's hairdo as being "so yesterday." The comment was captured by a live microphone.

The Washington Post's Robin Givhan writes widely-read columns on fashion, and has all the time in the world to consider the temperance, or lack thereof, of her critiques before they are published.

Given Givhan's situation and history, the WaPo fashion editor's characterization of Fiorina as a "style bully" (HT to Ann Althouse) is especially galling. If anyone has a track record of style bullying, it's Givhan, whose targets unsurprisingly are often conservatives and Republicans.

Sticking to the hair-raising subject at hand, the Media Research Center documented Givhan's given tendencies in an April 15, 2005 item:

Americans learned something interesting about the priorities of the New York Times Tuesday: its editors believe a political candidate pushing an employee three years ago is more important than a candidate calling his campaign rival a Nazi last week.

Such seems apparent from the Times' choice to report California Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman's alleged employee shoving incident in 2007.

By contrast, the Gray Lady has still not informed readers that Democrat gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown last Tuesday likened Whitman to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

As NewsBusters reported Saturday, Brown said the following to KCBS radio's Doug Sovern:

California's Democrat gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown on Tuesday called his Republican rival Meg Whitman a Nazi.

You probably didn't hear about this because America's media largely ignored it. 

By contrast, the press had a field day when Republican senatorial candidate Carly Fiorina made a comment about Barbara Boxer's (D-Calif.) hair that was picked up by an open microphone Tuesday evening.

Why the double standard?

Consider your answer as you read what Brown told KCBS radio's Doug Sovern (h/t NBer Gary Hall):

As of this Friday, NBC's Today show has yet to mention the Joe Sestak scandal, (as noted by the MRC's Tim Graham in this Media Reality Check) however they did find time to poke fun at Republican California Senate candidate Carly Fiorina making fun of Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer's hair in an open mic moment. On Thursday's Today, they ran the clip of Fiorina's gaffe three times, even leading the show with it in the opening teaser with co-anchor Meredith Vieira exclaiming: "Ay Carly! California Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina caught on an open mic making a joke about her opponent's hair."

Interesting to note that the reporters and producers at the Today show care more about a GOP Senate candidate mocking a Democrat's hairstyle than the White House attempting to manipulate a Senate race in Pennsylvania with a job offer.

The following takes on the Fiorina vs. Boxer open mic incident were aired on the June 10 Today show:

Monday’s American Morning on CNN covered the ClimateGate scandal extensively, but slanted towards those who deny that the exposed e-mails amount to much. Anchor John Roberts let the interim director of the Climate Research Unit at the center of the controversy give his talking points without question. Out of the four segments on the scandal, two featured skeptics of the theory of manmade climate change.

Roberts, reporting live from the University of East Anglia, home to the CRU, led the 6 am Eastern hour with a preview of the program’s ClimateGate coverage: “I am in Norwich, England at the University of East Anglia and behind me here, this cylindrical building, is the Climatic Research Unit which finds itself at the epicenter of what’s being called ‘ClimateGate.’ Four thousand e-mails and documents were hacked out of the Climatic Research Unit’s server system...Some of those e-mails were looked at by skeptics, and are now being used to cast doubt on all of the science surrounding global warming. Skeptics claiming that some scientists were manipulating data to further their cause.”

After the U.S. House of Representatives passed cap-and-trade legislation earlier this year by a thin seven-vote margin earlier this year, the possibility that it could become law seemed like it was a real one.

But after the dust settled some, the White House shifted its focused to so-called health care reform. And additionally, leaked emails surrounding the recent event known ClimateGate have put the entire premise of anthropogenic global warming in doubt. Thus, the likelihood of congressional Democrats getting a bill to the President's desk and signed into law has somewhat dimmed.

And that's a topic a special Thanksgiving Nov. 26 broadcast of Fox News "Special Report" took on. Host Bret Baier explained that there's pending legislation put forward by Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., with some rigid guidelines for carbon emissions.

On Thursday, following news that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had delayed a vote on cap and trade legislation until next year, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee James Inhofe (R-Okla.) chose to rub it in at Chairwoman Barbara Boxer's (D-Calif.) expense:

The fact that this whole idea on the global warming, I'm glad that's over and gone, done. We won, you lost, get a life. 

With Saturday's healthcare reform vote not going conservatives' way, it seems we all could use a much-needed laugh (video embedded below the fold):

For those wondering just how strong the sentiment being expressed at Tea Parties and town hall meetings is growing throughout the nation, consider that about 1,000 people turned out to demonstrate against ObamaCare Friday in one of the most liberal cities in America...San Francisco.

That's right, a Tea Party in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Cal.) own district.

Speakers included KSFO's Brian Sussman, and California Republican Party Vice Chairman Thomas Del Beccaro.

Also in attendance, and speaking to the crowd without a microphone due to problems with the sound system, was NewsBusters' own Noel Sheppard (video embedded below the fold, Sheppard appears at 7:10, h/t Michelle Malkin):

Chris Matthews, on Tuesday's "Hardball," invited on California Senator Barbara Boxer to dismiss the increasing number of townhall protestors opposed to Obama's liberal agenda as the "angry, and "noisy," "well-dressed middle-class people in pinks and limes...Brooks Brothers Brigade." After playing brief clips from the townhall protests Matthews devoted the first half of his show to knocking down their legitimacy, something Boxer actually instructed Matthews to do, as she urged the MSNBC host: "You, you in the media have to take a look at what's going on here. This is all planned. It's to hurt our president and it's to change the Congress." To which Matthews suggested the grassroots revolt should be ignored, as he depicted the protestors as stooges of the health care industry.

MATTHEWS: Do you think the health insurance companies that have made money for years on health care are the bad guys here? Do you think they're behind these so-called Astroturf demonstrations? That they're not really grassroots. These Brooks Brothers attacks on these congressional meetings?[audio available here]

Before the Boxer interview, Matthews invited on the Politico's Jeanne Cummings who also pooh-poohed the demonstrators:

On Monday’s The O’Reilly Factor, FNC’s Bill O’Reilly gave attention to the recent dustup between Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer and National Black Chamber of Commerce CEO Harry Alford, as O’Reilly hosted Alford to discuss Boxer’s recent attempt to use other black organizations to discredit Alford’s opposition to Cap and Trade during a Senate hearing. While Boxer declined to appear on the show, O’Reilly defended her in his discussion with Alford, arguing that her attacks on black political figures like Justice Clarence Thomas are rooted more in her opposition to their conservative views than by race, while Alford renewed his criticisms of Boxer. Alford:

It was pure race. It was like down there in Mississippi back in the bad old days when one black preacher would rise up against the big boss. He'd go find another black preacher to fight against that black preacher. You know, it was ugly. And she jumped, she opened up a mud pit that I wasn't going to jump into.

He continued:

On Thursday, NewsBusters asked if the media would notice Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Cal.) being called out by the CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce for her racist and condescending treatment of him during a Senate hearing.

Such seemed a particularly important question as this disgraceful event occurred on the 100th anniversary of the NAACP.

Yet, according to LexisNexis, not one major media outlet other than FNC thought it was at all newsworthy that Harry Alford called Boxer "God-awful" for pitting the opinions of other black organizations against his.

You think this would have been boycotted, especially on the 100th anniversary of the NAACP, if Boxer had an "R" next to her name instead of a "D"?

For those interested in hearing more from Alford, he was interviewed by LA radio host and Sarah Palin documentarian John Ziegler Friday, and made some comments about Boxer I guarantee media will also ignore (video embedded below the fold, h/t Hot Air):

With all the media focus this week concerning the confirmation hearings for Sonia Sotomayor, the woman who could become the first Hispanic member of the Supreme Court, it will be interesting to see if anyone notices a confrontation that happened Thursday between Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Cal.) and Harry Alford, the CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce.

During a hearing concerning the American Clean Energy and Security Act -- cap and tax to you and me -- Boxer for some reason chose to add to the record statements from the NAACP as well as the group 100 Black Men of Atlanta.

Alford took offense to this saying that the Senator was being "condescending," "racial," and it was "God awful" for her to pit the statements of other black groups against him (video embedded below the fold h/t Breitbart):

U.S. Army Brigadier General Michael Walsh "learned his lesson the hard way" by crossing a very testy Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in testimony before a Senate committee yesterday, according to MSNBC's Chris Matthews. [audio available here]

Walsh's grave transgression: calling the senator, "ma'am." For that, the "Hardball" host treated Walsh as part of the day's "political sideshow," literally, in his June 18 program:

Sen. BARBARA BOXER: Do me a favor. Could you say, "Senator," instead of "Ma'am"? It's just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title. So I'd appreciate it. Yes, thank you. 

Brig. Gen. WALSH: Yes, Senator.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: She sure did, she's been elected three times, by the way. So I guess the question is this: Had he said "sir" to a male senator, would that senator be correct in correcting the general? There is a history, however, and let us not forget, of male-female condescension in the U.S. Senate. Just recall the Anita Hill testimony of not too long ago.

Monday’s Washington Post touted on page A3 how "Californians Shape Up as Force on Environmental Policy," over three large pictures of liberals Henry Waxman, Nancy Pelosi, and Barbara Boxer. Something amazing followed: the word "liberal" is never used in the piece to describe them. (Pelosi merely is pressed to "find common ground between conservative and liberal Democrats.") Reporter Lyndsey Layton’s feat began in paragraph one:

California Democrats will assume pivotal roles in the new Congress and White House, giving the state an outsize influence over federal policy and increasing the likelihood that its culture of activist regulation will be imported to Washington.

Despite the Post’s welcoming of a "culture of activist regulation," Layton actually attempted to dismiss the idea that Waxman/Pelosi/Boxer will be in ideological lockstep:

One longtime Capitol Hill observer cautioned that although these Californians are in key positions to shape federal policy, they don't necessarily share a single California philosophy. [!] Still, they have been shaped by experience in a state that has led the nation in regulatory policy.

A high-level adviser for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Cali) was charged Wednesday with receiving and distributing child pornography.

UPDATE AT END OF POST: this is the second person with ties to Boxer arrested in the past year on similar charges. 

Although Jeff Rosato was arrested and fired last Friday, this story has garnered very little attention from the mainstream press.

Do you think the media would have been equally disinterested if he worked for a Republican?

While you ponder, here are the details reported by the Associated Press Thursday:

"A forceful advocate for families and women" is often left-wing code for a politician who strongly supports abortion rights and opposes any restriction on abortion.

It's also how Fox News Channel's Chris Wallace characterized Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) as she sat down shortly after 12:30 p.m. EDT today to discuss Sen. Hillary Clinton's speech this evening and the role of Clinton supporters, particularly women, in making or breaking Democratic Party unity heading into the general election.

Boxer has a solid 100% approval rating from NARAL Pro Choice America and voted in recent years 30 out of 31 times with liberal feminist group NOW.

To be fair to Wallace, his designation of Boxer as an advocate for women and families followed immediately after colleague Jon Scott noted that August 26 marks the 88th anniversary of ratification of the 19th Amendment which secured in the U.S. Constitution a woman's right to vote.

All the same, Wallace could just as warmly welcomed and thanked Boxer for sitting down for a chat without parroting a left-wing euphemisms for the liberal feminist agenda.

Who cares if Barack Obama won't protect a child who is born alive after an abortion?  Gas is over $4/gallon! 

So argued Donna Brazile when Bill Bennett pressed her on the matter today.  The issue arose during a post-Obama press conference kibitzing session on CNN's Situation Room.  Bennett was making the point that the complaisant media in attendance had failed to press the candidate on tough issues.

View video here.

In case you hadn't heard yet, the big, bad global warming bill authored by Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Virg.) was pulled for consideration Friday as sponsors were unable to drum up enough support for it to have any chance of passing.

This presents an interesting opportunity for climate alarmists in the media to have to choose what they will blame the speedy demise of this legislation on: currently exploding energy prices and the public's disinterest in a bill that will raise them further, or those dastardly, environmentally-challenged Republicans.

In fact, even the Associated Press seems torn on this issue, and released two different takes on Friday thereby giving press outlets a truly convenient culprit option (picture courtesy AP).

For instance, this was the opening paragraph of an AP piece published at 3:12 AM EDT Friday (emphasis added):

I already knew Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) wasn't a clear thinker, but I still had to chuckle at her quote in today's Washington Post article on climate change:

The president's plan to have America stand by while greenhouse gases reach dangerous levels and threaten America and the world is worse than doing nothing -- it is the height of irresponsibility.

What's the difference between "standing by" and "doing nothing"?

Why, no difference at all.

As climate alarmists around the world gather at a tropical resort in Bali to discuss the liberal bogeyman known as global warming, it is a metaphysical certitude green media will cheerlead the event while distorting science and history to blame all the planet's supposed ills on George W. Bush.

A fine example of this was a piece posted at Yahoo Friday evening which in its very first paragraph completely misrepresented the facts behind the Kyoto Protocol, and, especially, who was in the White House when this treaty was agreed upon and signed.

As reported by Agence France-Presse (h/t Tim Graham, emphasis added throughout):