Republican pollster and CBS News political analyst Frank Luntz wrote in a New York Times op-ed that in the wake of the 2014 elections Republicans and Democrats should work together to pass "common-sense solutions." But Luntz's call for bipartisanship is absurd considering his reported responsibility for some of the partisan gridlock he is currently lamenting. On the night of President Obama's first inauguration, Luntz reportedly convened a meeting of GOP leaders to discuss how they could obstruct the president's agenda in order to win future elections.
In a November 6 op-ed, Luntz warned Republicans to "stop blustering and fighting" and urged the parties to work together because Americans want "progress" and "don't care about Democratic solutions or Republican solutions":
Americans despair of the pointless posturing, empty promises and bad policies that result. Show that you are more concerned with people than politics. Don't be afraid to work with your opponents if it means achieving real results. Democrats and Republicans disagree on a lot, but there are also opportunities of real national importance, like national security and passing the trans-Atlantic trade deal.
Aside from a small activist constituency, Americans are not looking for another fight over same-sex marriage or abortion. This isn't to say that voters want their leaders to co-opt their convictions. People are simply tired of identity politics that pit men against women, black against white, wealthy against poor. More than ever, they want leadership that brings us together.
This isn't about pride of ownership regarding American progress; this is about progress, period. Americans don't care about Democratic solutions or Republican solutions. They just want common-sense solutions that make everyday life just a little bit easier. But they can't get their houses in order until Washington gets its own house in order.
Sharyl Attkisson's new book shows the common interest between a discredited journalist trying to cash in on right-wing credibility and the conservative machine that wants its media worldview confirmed.
Attkisson resigned in March after two decades at CBS News, reportedly in part because she believed the network had stymied her reporting due to "liberal bias." Staffers there reportedly characterized her work, which often focused on trumped-up claims of Obama administration misdeeds, as "agenda-driven," leading "network executives to doubt the impartiality of her reporting."
In her forthcoming book, Stonewalled, Attkisson alleges that the press has been protecting Obama from scrutiny for ideological reasons. "Attkisson doesn't explicitly accuse CBS and the rest of the mainstream media of a pervasive liberal bias," writes Fox News' Howard Kurtz in a review. "But that view is clear from sheer accumulation of detail in her book."
Based on press accounts, Attkisson's allegations of CBS News' bias rely largely on her own recollections of conversations she says she had with her former colleagues. The network declined Media Matters' request for comment, but one apparent subject of Attkisson's criticism has denied her account.
Attkisson's credibility is central to determining whether to believe her claims. Given her history of conspiratorial claims and shoddy reporting -- including her false and baseless claim that Media Matters may have been paid to attack her -- it is difficult to take her story at face value. But one thing is clear: her message is very valuable to both right-wing media and Attkisson herself.
Several hundred students reportedly protested George Will's speech last night at Miami University in response to his claim that efforts to fight sexual assault have made "victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges" on college campuses.
Will, whose column is distributed by the Washington Post News Service and Syndicate, has been criticized by U.S. senators, media, and women's equality groups since the publication of his "coveted status" piece on June 6. Will has been making similar comments for more than two decades.
The columnist's appearance at the Oxford, Ohio, campus -- for which he received $48,000 -- became the subject of controversy over the last week. Nearly 1,200 students, faculty, and staff signed a letter stating that hosting Will "sends the wrong message to current students, prospective students, and their families about the tolerance of rape culture and predatory sexual behavior at Miami University," according to the Miami University Women's Center. The speech also drew criticism from professors at the school's Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies program and the national women's rights group UltraViolet.
While protesters outside the Farmer School of Business event were denouncing Will's appearance and discussing their experiences with sexual assault on campus, inside, Will was defending his column from student critics. According to The Cincinnati Enquirer:
In response to the student Will said many have misconstrued the points in his column but acknowledged the controversy, saying "I've written columns since 1973, but the one you are talking about has certainly gotten the attention of this campus."
In response, Will defended his column and criticized "the dubious sociology" of ill-defined federal definitions of sexual assault that he contends diminishes the legal rights of the overwhelmingly male defendants assumed "guilty until proven innocent" under the new laws.
A second student who asked about Will about his column, who identified herself as a victim of sexual assault, subsequently told Cincinnati's WLWT:
She said she asked Will about his comments concerning the cost of treatment for sexual assault victims.
"He replied in a series of non-finished sentences at which point I said, 'I have specifically received treatment and is it worth it?' and he said, 'Yes, it is, but only for real survivors of real rape,' and it was very diminishing and deterring my ability to talk about it," she said.
Watch this report on the protests from Cincinnati's WCPO:
Here are some images from the protest, courtesy of the Facebook page of the Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies program:
It's become commonplace for the right-wing fringe to respond to breaking news by invoking Benghazi. The Ebola outbreak, the NFL's domestic violence problems, and the missing Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 are just three recent examples in the panoply of events that remind conservatives of the terrorist attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound, which they've spent the last two years trying to turn into a political scandal.
It's more unusual for a journalist from a mainstream outlet to engage in this sort of behavior. But here's how Josh Kraushaar, the political editor for National Journal, responded to the October 8 Washington Post report that suggested senior White House aides had hidden their knowledge of the fact that "a prostitute was an overnight guest in the hotel room" of one of the volunteers on the advance team for President Obama's 2012 trip to Colombia:
In isolation, the WH cover-up of staff misconduct is a blip. But it fits pattern of the WH hiding damaging info from the public b4 election.-- Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) October 9, 2014
... makes you wonder if the partisan criticisms have more merit than many first thought. http://t.co/5i7VKu1bXH-- Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) October 9, 2014
First instinct is to trust what the WH is saying, but they've squandered a lot of that trust lately.-- Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) October 9, 2014
Kraushaar's National Journal colleague Ron Fournier also recently invoked the administration's response to Benghazi as a reason for the public to doubt the federal government's response to Ebola.
Others referencing Benghazi in their discussions of the prostitution story include Ronald Kessler, the investigative journalist described as "a bit of a kook" who recently drew fire for suggesting that President Obama would be to blame if he were assassinated, and Steve Doocy, the Fox News host who previously complained that the deadly Hurricane Sandy "knocked [Benghazi] off the front page."
With the House Select Committee on Benghazi scheduled to convene for its first public hearing tomorrow, Media Matters is unveiling All Questions Answered, the definitive user's guide to the committee that demonstrates how conservative inquiries into the 2012 attacks have been litigated over and over again.
You can read All Questions Answered at BenghaziHoax.com, a new Media Matters website featuring our latest research and curating nearly 1,000 pieces we have produced over the past two years chronicling and debunking the lies right-wing media have pushed about Benghazi.
Fox News and the conservative media have been politicizing Benghazi for more than two years, seeking to turn the tragic events of that night into a phony scandal in order to damage President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The network took credit for House Speaker John Boehner's decision to create the select committee, a development Fox News contributors had sought for months. In the two weeks after the announcement the network devoted over 16 hours and 27 minutes -- at least 227 segments -- to Benghazi, a value of more than $124 million.
An excerpt from All Questions Answered details how the right-wing press turned an innocuous email from Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes into a sham "smoking gun," leading to the creation of the committee:
Conservative media outlets were up in arms, and they were soon followed by mainstream reporters. According to this new right-wing narrative, the White House had been withholding these emails from the public and congressional committees. But what did these emails actually demonstrate?
Rhodes' job on the National Security Council was to provide communications guidance to administration officials speaking on foreign policy issues. In the wake of upheaval across the entire region, with violent protests taking place in Cairo and the attack on the United States' diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, Rhodes was tasked with preparing messaging guidance for then-national security adviser Susan Rice. In the emails unveiled by Judicial Watch, Rhodes took CIA-authored talking points -- whose creation had been made public in detail a year earlier -- and turned them into a messaging document.
That no new information was revealed mattered little. Simply the perception that the Obama administration was hiding something from the public created a media firestorm.
All Questions Answered goes down the list of conservative questions about Benghazi one by one, debunking the lies and myths about the attacks and the Obama administration's response.
All Questions Answered is a supplement to Media Matters' best-selling 2013 ebook The Benghazi Hoax, which "tells in intimate detail the story of the deception created by those who fill airtime with savage punditry and pseudo-journalism and how the Republicans in charge of the investigative committees were empowered but ultimately failed to find a scandal - any kind of scandal - to tar a Democratic White House."
A new book that seeks to damage Hillary Clinton over the 2012 attacks in Benghazi reportedly relies on long-debunked conservative myths.
On September 9, WND Books will publish Aaron Klein's The REAL Benghazi Story: What the White House and Hillary Don't Want You to Know. The book's release is the latest salvo from a conservative cottage industry that aims to make money and political hay out of both Benghazi and Clinton smears.
Klein, a senior reporter for the birther site WND, is not a credible author -- one of his recent books portrayed President Obama as a "Manchurian Candidate" whose autobiography was ghostwritten by Bill Ayers.
The Washington Examiner's Paul Bedard, who reviewed an advance copy of Klein's Benghazi book, reported that Klein argues "Clinton was unwilling to provide additional security to the diplomatic outpost and even played a role in sending Stevens to his 'doomed mission.'"
Klein's contention that Clinton "was unwilling to provide additional security to the diplomatic outpost" seems to reference the long-debunked conservative claim that the then-Secretary of State personally signed off on cables rejecting requests for additional security. When congressional Republicans first made that claim in April 2013, diplomatic reporters noted that every cable sent to the State Department from overseas facilities is addressed to the secretary, and every cable sent from the State Department is signed by the secretary, even though the secretary rarely reviews them.
In her 2014 memoir, Clinton wrote that she had never seen the cables in question, stating, "That's not how it works. It shouldn't. And it didn't."
Klein's claim that Clinton "played a role in sending Stevens" to his death in Benghazi has also been debunked. The State Department's Accountability Review Board reported that Stevens "made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice," with the trip's timing "driven in part by commitments in Tripoli." Gregory Hicks, who was Stevens' deputy, also testified before Congress that the ambassador "chose to go" to Benghazi.
Americans are nonplussed by years of conservative media attacks on President Obama's golfing habits and largely think such criticisms are unfair, according to a new poll.
Only 31 percent of Americans think that it is fair to criticize presidents for playing golf compared to 54 percent who disagree, according to a YouGov poll conducted August 23-25. Similarly, only 30 percent of respondents say that President Obama "plays too much golf."
Since his inauguration, right-wing media figures have frequently criticized Obama for the rounds of golf he plays in Washington, D.C., and while on vacation, claiming that the activity is indicative of a disinterest in his job as president. Obama has been attacked for playing golf during the crisis in Ukraine, while U.S. Special Forces were en route to their mission against Osama Bin Laden, during or after earthquakes in the United States and Japan, and a variety of other instances.
Bill Burton, who served as deputy White House press secretary in the Obama administration, explained in a Politico Magazine piece that such criticisms are unfounded. Explaining that the president is never off duty, even when he is on vacation, Burton wrote:
Whether you're a partisan or a cynical reporter who has been making the same critique about presidential vacations for decades, I assume you probably agree that human beings function better when they get a little time away. I wouldn't want my surgeon to be some woman who hasn't had a break in 4 years. I wouldn't want to share the road with a truck driver who hasn't had enough sleep. It doesn't matter what your occupation is; you will do your job better if you recharge your batteries. And even though the president is never really on vacation, giving him at least a little downtime is good for all of us.
In the end, it's not about the optics. It's about doing your job. And if the president is doing his - which he is - we should all be able to appreciate the fact that he is taking the opportunity to be a dad, a husband and even a leader of the free world who can clear his head on the golf course.
After coming under heavy criticism for exploiting the death of comedian Robin Williams to attack "political leftists," radio host Rush Limbaugh responded to the uproar by lashing out at Media Matters and the "leftist media" for highlighting his remarks.
During the August 12 broadcast of his show, Limbaugh tied Williams' death to what he described as the "leftist worldview." Discussing media accounts of Williams' suicide, Limbaugh said that the "survivor's guilt" mentioned as a possible contributing factor is "a constant measurement that is made by political leftists in judging the country":
Right here it says that one the contributing factors to Robin Williams deciding to kill himself was "survivor's guilt." It's in the headline.
I read that and I thought, "Survivor's guilt? What? What survivor's guilt? What?" So I read it, and it turns out that three of his closest friends, the story says -- Christopher Reeve, John Belushi, and Andy Kaufman... The source, unnamed in the story, said that Robin Williams felt guilty that he was still alive while his three friends had died young and much earlier than he had.
He could never get over the guilt that they died and he didn't.
Well, that is a constant measurement that is made by political leftists in judging the country. It's outcome-based education: 2 + 2 = 5. "That's fine until the student learns it's 4. We're not gonna humiliate the student by pointing out that he's wrong. If he figures it out, cool. We're gonna take the fast learners and we're gonna slow them down so that they don't humiliate the kids that don't learn as fast as they do. It's just not fair."
Limbaugh's comments were widely reported by numerous media outlets. On his August 13 broadcast, Limbaugh responded to outrage over his comments by denying that he had "accused Robin Williams of committing suicide because he was a liberal," and blaming the negative response to his comments on Media Matters and the "leftist media.
Limbaugh has used similar tactics for years to escape responsibility for his commentary - - at times he even claims his offensive statements were an intentional "media tweak," a comment deliberately intended to draw attention from reporters.
In a rare exception, after coming under heavy criticism in 2012 for describing then-law student Sandra Fluke as a "slut" and a "prostitute," Limbaugh "sincerely apologize[d]" to her, saying he "did not mean a personal attack" by launching 44 personal insults at her over three broadcasts. Those comments led to a massive advertiser boycott of Limbaugh's program that continues to this day.
Fox News host and Daily Caller editor-in-chief Tucker Carlson claimed that the government "wants to know" if people have firearms in their houses "because they'd like to disarm you," echoing a common conspiracy theory from gun lobby extremists.
On the August 10 edition of Fox & Friends Sunday, co-host Heather Nauert reported on a mother's effort to lobby the New York state legislature to pass a bill requiring the safe storage of guns in homes, after her son was killed in an accidental shooting at a friend's house. Nauert asked viewers, "when your child goes to another family's house, do you ever think to ask if they have a gun?"
After the report, Carlson said he would be "offended" if a parent asked him about firearms in his home. "If somebody asked me -- the idea that 93 percent of people don't mind if you ask them if they have a firearm at home -- I find that a very private question," said Carlson. "It's something that government wants to know because they'd like to disarm you. But I -- it's something that I'm not comfortable talking about with other people, and I would be offended by that question."
The National Rifle Association frequently -- and falsely -- claims that the government is collecting information about privately-owned firearms in order to confiscate them at a later time. A recent commentary video from the gun group baselessly claimed that "the government is collecting more and more gun registration data which could be used against gun owners in the form of full confiscation," and the NRA's president Jim Porter has claimed that the Obama administration is using Medicare enrollment forms to create a national gun registry even though no questions about guns appear on the form.
Carlson also criticized Nauert's report for suggesting that "guns are scary, gun owners are a threat to you and your children." He said that "far more children died last year drowning in their bathtubs than were killed accidentally by guns" and stated that he "would like to see a package on, do you have a bathtub at home? Because I need to know that before I send my child over to your house."
Carlson also claimed that "the places with the highest levels of gun ownership" are "the safest places," citing Maine, Wyoming, and Vermont as states where "you're not going to get hurt." In fact, as the Huffington Post noted, a Violence Policy Center study that reviewed 2011 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that "States with weak gun-control laws and higher rates of gun ownership tend to have higher rates of gun deaths, while states with stronger policies and fewer gun owners have significantly lower rates of gun-related deaths." Wyoming had the fourth highest rate of gun deaths in the study.
From Fox & Friends Sunday:
(h/t Raw Story)
Fox News host Howard Kurtz criticized CBS News political analyst Frank Luntz for failing to disclose during a CBS appearance about a congressional election that Luntz had previously been a paid consultant for the candidate.
"I think you should have," Kurtz said during an August 10 interview with Luntz on his #MediaBuzz media criticism program, "because it just would have been leveling with the audience, hey, this is not some stranger."
Luntz discussed then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-VA) surprise primary defeat on the June 11 edition of CBS This Morning, calling the loss "a blow for conversation" that is "bad for the country" because Cantor was "a pipeline to Americans who just wanted people to get things done." But neither he nor CBS acknowledged that Cantor's campaign had paid Luntz's company more than $15,000 in fees, as Media Matters documented.
Asked by Kurtz about the lack of disclosure, Luntz said that while "People raised that as an issue," he did not think it was necessary because he was introduced by CBS "as a Republican."
Luntz's excuse is consistent with that of a CBS spokesperson who told The Washington Post's Erik Wemple in June that the network had provided sufficient disclosure because Luntz's "work as a strategist for Republicans was disclosed on the broadcast."
But as Wemple noted, "When it comes to getting people to say favorable things about other people, there's nothing like a consultant-client relationship to facilitate things. When money changes hands, journalism ethics must pay heed." Media ethicists agreed in interviews with Media Matters, ripping CBS News for "outrageous" behavior that could be considered "not only bad, but corrupt."