Howard Kurtz - CBS spreads Supreme Court rumor

Howard Kurtz - CBS spreads Supreme Court rumor

The White House ripped CBS News on Thursday for publishing an online column by a blogger who made assertions about the sexual orientation of Solicitor General Elena Kagan, widely viewed as a leading candidate for the Supreme Court.

Ben Domenech, a former Bush administration aide and Republican Senate staffer, wrote that President Obama would "please" much of his base by picking the "first openly gay justice." An administration official, who asked not to be identified discussing personal matters, said Kagan is not a lesbian.

CBS initially refused to pull the posting, prompting Anita Dunn, a former White House communications director who is working with the administration on the high court vacancy, to say: "The fact that they've chosen to become enablers of people posting lies on their site tells us where the journalistic standards of CBS are in 2010." She said the network was giving a platform to a blogger "with a history of plagiarism" who was "applying old stereotypes to single women with successful careers."

The network deleted the posting Thursday night after Domenech said he was merely repeating a rumor. The flare-up underscores how quickly the battle over a Supreme Court nominee -- or even a potential nominee -- can turn searingly personal. Most major news organizations have policies against "outing" gays or reporting on the sex lives of public officials unless they are related to their public duties.

A White House spokesman, Ben LaBolt, said he complained to CBS because the column "made false charges." Domenech later added an update to the post: "I have to correct my text here to say that Kagan is apparently still closeted -- odd, because her female partner is rather well known in Harvard circles." ...

Widely publicized 4/20 poll actually shows majority support for drug reforms | Raw Story

Widely publicized 4/20 poll actually shows majority support for drug reforms | Raw Story

AT BOTTOM: California survey shows legalization winning out 56-42 percent

As with many instances in politics, actuality can often be obscured behind the wrong frame: ask a question just the right way and results can be wildly tilted, one way or another.

Take the case of an Associated Press/CNBC poll released on April 20, 2010, detailing Americans' opinions on legalizing marijuana. The poll was widely reported as declaring that 55 percent in the U.S. are opposed to ending prohibition.

Make no mistake, "oppose" is exactly what 55 percent of the people said when asked: "Do you favor, oppose or neither favor nor oppose the complete legalization of the use of marijuana for any purpose?"

However, a more nuanced probing of the issue, carried out by the polling firm but almost entirely unmentioned in the media on April 20th, found that when stacked next to alcohol, often a more debilitating and addictive substance, statistical support for drug law reforms skyrocketed.

Appearing on page four of the 22-page document, poll workers asked respondents whether or not the U.S. should treat marijuana and alcohol similarly. While 43 percent wanted rules more strict than those applied to alcohol, 44 percent wanted the two handled equally. Another 12 percent wanted less strict rules for pot over alcohol.

"... [Meaning] that a full 56 percent support the policy change -- perhaps the highest number ever recorded in favor of legalization," Huffington Post's Ryan Grim noted.

The AP's own report completely failed to mention the key data, which would appear to contradict their lead angle. Instead, the news wire handed the story's sole alcohol reference to the California Narcotics Officers Association, which suggested marijuana legalization is unpopular due to problems caused by alcohol and prescription drugs. ....

Can We Shut Down the Gallup Organization, Please? - Grasping Reality with C-Beams Near the Tannhauser Gate

Can We Shut Down the Gallup Organization, Please? - Grasping Reality with C-Beams Near the Tannhauser Gate

There is a level of incompetence beyond which organizations should simply quietly die, isn't there?

Eric Boehlert:

Again, does Gallup read its own polling results? | Media Matters for America: From the polling firm's site today....

President Barack Obama's 48.8% job approval average for his fifth quarter in office is down slightly from his prior quarter, and ranks among the lowest for elected presidents' fifth quarters since World War II.

This is just dopey.... Here is a sample of fifth quarter approval ratings for some presidents since World War II. After reading, tell me if you think Obama's current standing is in any way unusual or newsworthy:

Obama: 49%. Clinton: 52%. Reagan: 46%. Carter: 48%. Ford: 47%. Truman: 44%...

Tax Day Fact Check: Most Americans Got A Tax Cut This Year

Tax Day Fact Check: Most Americans Got A Tax Cut This Year

On Tuesday, a wave of protesters, upset with overly-burdensome taxation by the federal government, are set to descend on the nation's capital to express their displeasure.

But does their anger reflect the truth about today's tax rates?

After all, neutral economists insist that, under the Obama administration, the overwhelming likelihood is that your tax burden has gone down, not up. Even conservative economic analysts acknowledge that there really is no basis for middle- and working-class Americans to believe that they're suddenly paying more.

"The only tax I think that has been put in place so far is an increase in the federal cigarette tax. I can't think of another Obama tax that has gone in place so far," said Chris Edwards, Director of Tax Policy Studies at the conservative Cato Institute. "I would say that people are angry because big taxes are coming down the road because of the gigantic deficit built up under Bush and continued under Obama." ...

Dodd: GOP Leader Lied About Finance Bill | TheLedger.com

Dodd: GOP Leader Lied About Finance Bill | TheLedger.com

Dodd: GOP Leader Lied About Finance Bill

Senator delivers blistering speech on "naked political strategy" by Republicans.

By Kevin G. Hall
McClatchy Newspapers

Published: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 at 11:02 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 at 11:02 p.m.

WASHINGTON | The architect of sweeping legislation that would revamp financial regulation took the Senate floor on Wednesday to accuse the Senate Republican leader of lying about the bill and being in Wall Street's back pocket.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., delivered a blistering, 20-minute speech that included the revelation of a political talking points memo from a Republican strategist that was virtually verbatim to the criticism voiced Tuesday by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

McConnell had accused Dodd of drafting partisan legislation, even though the Banking Committee chairman has worked for roughly half a year with key Senate Republicans and incorporated many of their ideas into his bill. McConnell also said the bill continues controversial bank bailouts, but it doesn't.

"It's a naked political strategy," thundered a visibly upset Dodd.

He held up a leaked memo attributed to GOP strategist Frank Luntz that advises Republican lawmakers to accuse Dodd and other Democrats of perpetuating bailouts for giant banks.

The public disliked the bank bailouts, so framing the Democrats' financial overhaul legislation as a "bailout" could win Republicans votes.

"Nothing could be further from the truth. The bill as drafted ends bailouts," Dodd said, describing how regulators would get new powers to dissolve large financial institutions, even healthy ones if their size is deemed to threaten the broader financial system. ...

OpEdNews - Article: When Truth Gets in the Way

OpEdNews - Article: When Truth Gets in the Way

For OpEdNews: David Glenn Cox - Writer

In response to the Supreme Court's decision allowing unlimited corporate funding of political ads, Representative Chris Van Hollen and Senator Charles Schumer plan to introduce legislation that would require donors to identify themselves in all of their political ads.

Lobbying groups argue that's just not fair; if we just want to call ourselves citizens for responsible energy policy, we should be able to do so. The legislation would require the disclaimer to read: brought to you by Exxon Mobil and the Nuclear Power Plant Operators Association. This legislation has not even been introduced yet and the lobbying industry is already circling the wagons and the charge is being led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Last year the Chamber spent $47 million on lobbying in the halls of power on single issue campaigns and expects to spend $50 million this year on candidate-focused ads.

The Chamber had worked hard to end what it saw as discrimination against corporate free speech and hailed the Supreme Court's decision as a landmark event of real progress. They aren't about to be turned back nor are they going to sit back and take a wait and see approach.

For instance, Massey Energy, the company that owns the coal mine where twenty-five workers were killed in West Virginia, had been fined $900,000 for past safety violations. The company is appealing more than a quarter of those fines. In 1996 Massey was fined for a fire that killed two workers and a civil suit brought a damage judgement of $50 million. As the case wound through the appeals process Massey Energy donated more than $3 million to Brent Benjamin, a candidate for the West Virginia Court of Appeals. The three million dollars was more than 60 percent of Benjamin's total campaign fund. Once elected Justice Benjamin refused to recuse himself from the case and sided with Massey Energy in overturning the verdict.

The Supreme Court in this case overruled the Benjamin decision but listen to what Justice Scalia said in the dissenting opinion. "The Court today continues its quixotic quest to right all wrongs and repair all imperfections through the Constitution. Alas, the quest cannot succeed - which is why some wrongs and imperfections have been called nonjusticiable."

In layman's speak Scalia is saying, "So what? People died. So what?" The company bought themselves a judge. The world's not a perfect place. So what?

On top of the $47 million spent last year, the U.S. Chamber spent $144 million lobbying on behalf of Exxon Mobil. Exxon Mobil was the Chamber's largest customer, five times the size of their next largest customer, the health care industry. So when you're watching "Meet the Press" or CNN and they have a representative of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as a guest, remember it's not some altruistic business council but a paid lobbyist who doesn't want you to know that he or she is a paid employee of Exxon Mobil. ...

Secret Funding of Chamber’s Political Ads May Change (Update1) - BusinessWeek

Secret Funding of Chamber’s Political Ads May Change (Update1) - BusinessWeek
By Jonathan D. Salant and Mark Drajem

April 7 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. companies would lose their ability to secretly finance political advertising run by organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce under a bill being considered by Democratic lawmakers.

The proposed legislation is a response to a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations to spend unlimited amounts of their own money on political ads that call for electing or defeating candidates. The Jan. 21 decision triggered concern that companies would funnel unprecedented sums of cash into the Chamber’s system of anonymously funded pro-business campaigns.

President Barack Obama criticized the court opinion in his Jan. 28 State of the Union address, saying it would “open the floodgates for special interests.” The bill, which may be introduced as early as next week, would require nonprofit groups, unions and trade associations including the Chamber to identify who pays for ads designed to sway opinion on candidates for federal office.

“The Chamber is going to end up with at least one very undesirable element: The public is going to know exactly which corporations are the major funders,” said Craig Holman, who handles campaign finance issues for Public Citizen, a Washington group that supports more regulation of political giving.

The nation’s biggest business lobbying group, the Chamber spent $47 million on so-called issue advertising last year, mostly on health-care policy, according to Kandar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group in Arlington, Virginia. The Chamber has said it plans to spend $50 million on candidate- focused ads alone this year.

$144 Million in Lobbying

An additional $144 million of Chamber spending went for lobbying last year, more than five times that of the second- largest spender, Exxon Mobil Corp. That spending isn’t affected by the court ruling or proposed legislation.

The Chamber had fought what it called the suppression of company participation in elections, and hailed the Supreme Court decision in the case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The proposed legislation would gut what appeared to be a victory for the group. ...