In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.To the extent the original clip and Breitbart's description portrayed Sherrod as having engaged in a racist act in the past, such implication literally was true, as Sherrod admits. The actions people in the Obama administration took, and the conclusions the media drew from that literal truth may have been unfair and precipitous, but that does not make the clip defamatory.
Proponents of the Islamic Center may have every right to build at this site, and may even have chosen the site to send a positive message about Islam. The bigotry some have expressed in attacking them is unfair, and wrong. But ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right. In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain – unnecessarily – and that is not right.Predictably, the surprising announcement has set off a fury of "first they came for" statements from the left-wing bloggers who usually act in sympathy with the ADL - except when it comes to Israel. The schism between pro-Israel Jews and Israel-meh Jews has been exposed in full force.
The new survey by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research shows Reid and Angle neck and neck. The Senate majority leader would win 43 percent and Angle 42 percent of support from likely Nevada voters if the election were held now. The margin of error is plus or minus 4 percentage points on the statewide telephone survey of 625 registered voters taken Monday through Wednesday.Reid is viewed unfavorably by 51%, versus 47% for Angle.A July 12-14 Mason-Dixon poll showed Reid 7 points ahead of Angle, 44-37. It was the best showing for the four-term incumbent -- and the worst for Angle -- in a head-to-head matchup, according to a series of surveys for the Review-Journal since last year.
I have not watched any clips of Obama on The View.
Despite its name, membership in the liberal online community Journolist wasn’t limited to journalists. Present among the bloggers, reporters and editors were a number of professional political operatives, including top White House economic advisors, key Obama political appointees, and Democratic campaign veterans. Some left government to join Journolist. Others took the opposite route. A few contributed to Journolist from their perches in politics. At times, it became difficult to tell who was supposed to be covering policy and who was trying to make it.Brent Bozell has 20 questions for The Washington Post about its knowledge of and involvement with the Journolist.Two of the administration’s chief economic advisors, Jared Bernstein, the vice president’s top economist, and Jason Furman, deputy director of the National Economic Council, were members of Journolist until they began working officially for Obama.
Ilan Goldenberg, now an advisor on Middle East policy at the Pentagon, was a member until he joined the administration. Moira Whelan left Journolist to work at the Department of Homeland Security .
Anne-Marie Slaughter left to work at the State Department. Former Journolist member Ben Brandzel is now a top staffer at Organizing for America, the political arm of the Obama White House.
Josh Orton, a former spokesman for Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NM)[sic - should be NV], became Obama’s deputy director of new media during the 2008 presidential campaign. After the election, he joined Journolist.
In which Washington, D.C. area parking garage will the entire Journolist archive be handed over to us?
But 48% of the state’s voters have a Very Unfavorable view of Reid. Forty-one percent (41%) say the same of Angle. Overall, 55% have at least a somewhat unfavorable opinion of Reid and 56% view Angle at least somewhat unfavorably.Likely voters also self-identify significantly more conservative than liberal:
Forty-five percent (45%) of Nevada’s Likely Voters consider themselves at least somewhat conservative and 24% consider themselves at least somewhat liberal. Those figures include 18% who are Very Conservative and 6% who are Very Liberal.Yet likely voters view Reid overwhelmingly as liberal, which puts him out of touch ideologically with the electorate:
Sixty-two percent (62%) describe the longtime Democratic senator as a liberal, and 50% characterize his views as extreme. Forty-one percent (41%) put Reid in the mainstream.Reid's relentless attacks, supported by a sympathetic mainstream media and active left-wing blogosphere, have increased Angle's negatives.Angle, who is seen as a conservative by 81% of the state’s voters, is viewed as holding extreme views by 58%. Thirty-seven percent (37%) see the GOP nominee in the mainstream.
Among voters not affiliated with either major party, 55% consider Reid’s views extreme while 52% say the same about Angle.What these numbers show is what everyone knew. Harry Reid was able to take advantage of a superior campaign machine and deep pockets in the several weeks after the primary, but Reid remains very unpopular.
Assuming the Angle campaign gets onto better footing and starts getting its ads on television, this race can still be won.I particularly like this observation from the otherwise gloomy Jim Geraghty:
One big reason Reid is in trouble is that the agenda he’s working to enact in Washington is the opposite of what Nevadans want.The Rasmussen poll, coming after the best six weeks Harry Reid ever will have, may mark the high water mark for Reid, unless he can move the 48% of likely voters who still strongly dislike him.
A judge has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona's new immigration law from taking effect Thursday, handing a major legal victory to opponents of the crackdown.The decision was a surprise to me in that it struck the provision -- which was most controversial -- as to checking immigration status of persons already arrested or stopped for some other offense if there were a reasonable suspicion that the person was in the country illegally.
The law will still take effect Thursday, but without many of the provisions that angered opponents—including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws. The judge also put on hold a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places.
The Court first addresses the second sentence of Section 2(B): “Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released.”The result of this statutory interpretation was that the Court found the procedure -- as written -- to interfere with the federal immigration scheme:
Arizona advances that the proper interpretation of this sentence is “that only where a reasonable suspicion exists that a person arrested is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States must the person’s immigration status be determined before the person is released.” (Defs.’ Resp. to Pl.’s Mot. (“Defs.’ Resp.”) at 10.) Arizona goes on to state, “[T]he Arizona Legislature could not have intended to compel Arizona’s law enforcement officers to determine and verify the immigration status of every single person arrested – even for United States citizens and when there is absolutely no reason to believe the person is unlawfully present in the country.” (Id.)
The Court cannot interpret this provision as Arizona suggests. Before the passage of H.B. 2162, the first sentence of Section 2(B) of the original S.B. 1070 began, “For any lawful contact” rather than “For any lawful stop, detention or arrest.” (Compare original S.B. 1070 § 2(B) with H.B. 2162 § 3(B).) The second sentence w s identical in the original version and as modified by H.B. 2162. It is not a logical interpretation of the Arizona Legislature’s intent to state that it originally intended the first two sentences of Section 2(B) to be read as Section 2(B) are clearly independent of one another. Therefore, it does not follow logically that by changing “any lawful contact” to “any lawful stop, detention or arrest” in the first sentence, the Arizona Legislature intended to alter the meaning of the second sentence in any way. If that had been the Legislature’s intent, it could easily have modified the second sentence accordingly."
Thus, an increase in the number of requests for determinations of immigration status, such as is likely to result from the mandatory requirement that Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies check the immigration status of any person who is arrested, will divert resources from the federal government’s other responsibilities and priorities.The Court also opined on potential 4th Amendment issues with the law, and used that as a second basis for the decision (at p. 16):
Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked. Given the large number of people who are technically “arrested” but never booked into jail or perhaps even transported to a law enforcement facility, detention time for this category of arrestee will certainly be extended during an immigration status verification.Similar reasoning was used in striking the provisions as to status checks during stops (short of arrest).
A.R.S. § 13-2929: creating a separate crime for a person in violation of a criminal offense to transport or harbor an unlawfully present alien or encourage or induce an unlawfully present alien to come to or live in Arizonaand
A.R.S. § 28-3511: amending the provisions for the removal or impoundment of a vehicle to permit impoundment of vehicles used in the transporting or harboring of unlawfully present aliens[Note to readers: The analysis above has been adjusted from the original as time permitted a more complete reading of the decision]
So much for transparency.Although I didn't notice this provision (or else it would not have been "little-noticed"), I did call the legislation out as just another "impenetrable behemoth."
Under a little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation, the Securities and Exchange Commission no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act.
The law, signed last week by President Obama, exempts the SEC from disclosing records or information derived from "surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities." Given that the SEC is a regulatory body, the provision covers almost every action by the agency, lawyers say. Congress and federal agencies can request information, but the public cannot.
People will die for that Nobel Prize. The Times of London:"Anyone who believes that the Government abuses its secrecy powers in order to keep the citizenry in the dark and manipulate public opinion -- and who, at this point, doesn't believe that? -- should be squarely on the side of the greater transparency which Wikileaks and its sources, sometimes single-handedly, are providing."
Hundreds of Afghan civilians who worked as informants for the U.S. military have been put at risk by WikiLeaks' publication of more than 90,000 classified intelligence reports which name and in many cases locate the individuals, The Times newspaper reported Wednesday....--------------------------------------------
The article says, in spite of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's claim that sensitive information had been removed from the leaked documents, that reporters scanning the reports for just a couple hours found hundreds of Afghan names mentioned as aiding the U.S.-led war effort.
“Journolist was pretty offensive. Those of us who are mainstream journalists got mixed in with journalists with an agenda. Those folks who thought they were improving journalism are destroying the credibility of journalism.Welcome to the world of the sleepless, Chuckie.
“This has kept me up nights. I try to be fair. It’s very depressing.”
--------------------------------------------"I understand what the purpose of the list was," Todd told me. "A minority of folks created a perception problem for the list. And there's clearly a campaign by some conservatives to use this."
The problem, Todd added, is that J-List created a "perception that the right's claim of a so-called liberal media conspiracy is true, which is not the case."
... let me turn to the prejudiced – those who don’t differentiate between real Islam and the extremist version.Turkey thus is absolved of all responsibility for its own actions which in the past several years have been anything but as described by Cameron. The rise of anti-Western, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic forces in Turkey is our fault, no doubt, in this twisted view of reality.They don’t understand the values that Islam shares with other religions like Christianity and Judaism that all of these are inherently peaceful religions. Nor do they understand that Turkey is a peaceful country, with a long history of religious tolerance.
I know that Gaza has led to real strains in Turkey’s relationship with Israel, but Turkey is a friend of Israel, and I urge Turkey, and Israel, not to give up on that friendship.Yet Cameron mentioned not a single word of criticism for the fact that Turkey instigated the Gaza flotilla incident, that there were Islamist provocateurs on the lead ship, that Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has been attacking Israel for years, and that Turkey has tried to undermine U.N. sanctions against Iran.
Let me be clear: the Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla was completely unacceptable. And I have told Prime Minister Netanyahu we will expect the Israeli inquiry to be swift, transparent and rigorous. Let me also be clear that the situation in Gaza has to change. Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.
I almost forgot, how is that Whole Foods boycott going?Arizona's tourism industry has a target on its back, but the widespread boycotts over the state's immigration law might not be hitting the mark.
Recent data compiled by a market research group show hotel bookings across the state -- as well as in tourism hot spots Phoenix and Scottsdale -- have been on the rise the past two months.
The numbers could dispel warnings from local officials that Arizona stands to lose a fortune and dampen the chances that cities and organizations will be able to compel the state to reverse its immigration law by choking its economy with a sanctions-style business boycott.
The Daily Caller has highlighted some of Journolist’s worst moments — such as when liberal members of the media plotted to kill important stories about the presidential campaign.Such as?But the 400-member listserv, like any community, was a complex arrangement comprised of many individual voices.
While some urged members to level indiscriminate charges of racism, other postings reflected admirable integrity or civility.
"I will try to understand your point of view. Have a nice day. Are you going to live blog O on The View?"--------------------------------------------
Following an anti-Semitic attack in Hanover, German authorities have identified a new source of anti-Semitic hatred in Germany: young migrants from Muslim families. The ideological alliance has officials concerned.There is a common denominator in Malmö and Hanover. And it's not just the involvement of Muslim immigrants.
It was supposed to be a carefree festival in Sahlkamp on the outskirts of the northern German city of Hanover. Billed as an "International Day" to celebrate social diversity and togetherness, the June celebration included performances by a multicultural children's choir called "Happy Rainbow" and the German-Turkish rap duo 3-K. Music from Afghanistan was also on the program.
But then the mood suddenly shifted.When Hajo Arnds, the organizer of the neighborhood festival, stepped onto the stage at about 6:45 p.m. to announce the next performance, by the Jewish dance group Chaverim, he was greeted with catcalls. "Jews out!" some of the roughly 30 young people standing in front of the stage began shouting. "Gone with the Jews!"
The voices were those of children -- voices full of hate, shouted in unison and amplified by a toy megaphone. Arnds, the organizer, was shocked. He knew many of the children, most of them from Arab immigrant families in the neighborhood....
An informal and accidental alliance has been developing for some time between neo-Nazis and some members of a group they would normally despise: Muslim immigrants. The two groups seem to share vaguely similar anti-Semitic ideologies.
Right-wing extremists and Islamists, says Heinz Fromm, the president of the German domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), are united by "a common bogeyman: Israel and the Jews as a whole."
While German right-wing extremists cultivate a "more or less obvious racist anti-Semitism," says Fromm, the Islamists are "oriented toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict" and support "anti-Zionist ideological positions, which can also have anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic overtones." Both extremist movements, says Fromm, "ascribe extraordinary political power to Israel and the Jews, and their goal is to fight this power."
As I documented earlier, in their email exchanges the Journolistas were worried that assailing Sarah Palin over Trig's birth might backfire.Journey into the Media’s Heart of Darkness
How ironic that on a day when we celebrate the 20th anniversary of the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, The Daily Caller released 15 pages of JournoListers’ email exchanges about a dark and demented conspiracy regarding my son, Trig.
It’s tough to fittingly describe these numerous members of the mainstream media who actively engaged in the debate about this conspiracy back when I was first introduced as John McCain’s running mate, and it’s impossible to legitimize any “prominent” media publication that continues to traffic in this bizarre narrative today.
It wasn’t just a few fringe characters in that JournoList discussion. It included writers for major newspapers, magazines, and online news publications. Those participating in this immature exchange in attempts to plant seeds of doubt and falsely accuse even included a famous historian.
This JournoList exchange exposes the warped nature of today’s media, thus explaining why many of us are forced, in fairness to the public, to utilize other mediums to communicate until the mainstream media wakes up and begins respecting the public’s intelligence and desire for truth in reporting. There is a sickness and darkness in today’s liberal media. With revelations like the JournoList exchanges, may the light keep shining to expose the problem.
It’s always darkest before the dawn. My hope, therefore, is that today, marking the anniversary of our nation’s attempt to show respect for our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters with special needs, will also mark the beginning of a new, more respectful discourse among members of our media who at least aspire to be fair and objective.
- Sarah Palin
Would it have been better if Sharron Angle were at this point six weeks ago? Of course.Jordan Gehrke, Angle's deputy campaign manager, said Friday he understands that some Republicans are concerned about the race. But he said Angle is putting together a professional team of experienced political operatives.
"In just a few weeks, the Angle campaign has raised over two million dollars, assembled a top flight team, and put a significant ad buy on TV that introduces Sharron Angle to the people of Nevada and exposes Harry Reid's disastrous economic record," Gehrke said. "Reid's in for a long couple months."
If this baby story is true, palin will come out looking like a hero — she stepped in when her teen freaked out, threatened suicide, whatever. She went to extraordinary lengths, like a mother should do, to protect her daughter and solve the problem! No abortion necessary! Another pro-life fable for our times.Shannon Brownlee of the New America Foundation took a similar line:
Katha’s point is that while some might find it reprehensible to raise a grandchild as your own, many if not most American’s don’t share that view. If the point of investigating this is to discredit Palin and show her up as an unfit mother and therefore unfit VP, the story may backfire. She comes out looking like a heroine not a villain.The other theme was that it might be a set-up.
In the post-Rathergate era, journalists should be on their guard for Republican dirty tricks.Mark Kleiman reiterated this fear of a set up:
If this story gains traction, regardless of its truth or falsity, the Republicans will take steps to neutralize the meme.
It wouldn’t surprise me if the McCain campaign were to leak doctored evidence for the sole purpose of discrediting it and destroying the journalist who published it. That’s probably what the Killian memos were.We should also be on guard for “evidence” falling into the lap of an unknown and easily discredited figure. That’s probably what Rove did to neutralize the allegations of cocaine use by George W. Bush, lo these many years ago.
If apparently well-substantiated allegations emerge, we should be alert for the story behind the story, so to speak.
Adam Serwer of The American Prospect also smelled a set-up:Politically, this smells like a red herring and a trap, and I think that the revelation that someone was sniffing around about it would outrage large numbers of voters. Palin’s public life presents a target-rich environment for
investigation.So this story desperately needs a good leaving-alone.
I gotta say, if this is much ado about nothing, the McCain campaign may be very happy to air these rumors in public. It gives them their first big opportunity to say that she’s being attacked unfairly, and because Democrats are sexist.Rick Perlstein who worked for the Campaign for America's Future, suggested a reporter should obtain medial information about the Palins (which probably would be a violation of law) on the sly:
Remember how Eagleton went down: a reporter got a tip from someone who actually turned out (believe it or not, Nixon had nothing to do with it) to be a McGovern supporter worried he’d drag down the ticket. The reporter went to the hospital where Eagleton had allegedly been treated and said he was there to discuss Eagleton’s treatment, and an indiscreet hospital employee said something like s/he thought someone would find out about Eagleton’s mental problems (check this out; I’mworking from memory).It’s not like an enterprising reporter couldn’t try the same thing today.
Of all the banter, perhaps the most important big picture item is that the discussion frequently centered on whether the story was worth running. This is the type of coordination and groupthink which has generated the criticism of the Journolist.
Moira Whelan, a Huffington Post blogger and Director of Strategy at National Security Network, was most blunt about it (emphasis mine):I dont think anyone from this list is running with it, but as I see it, the task is to set the frame that the Palin pick showed bad judgment on McCain’s part. That way when/if it does pop, it gets into that meme without people having to express outrage.If you really want to know what they were afraid of, Kathleen Geier of Talking Points Meme summed it up:
I am really hoping Palin will self-immolate and bring down the ticket with her.The emerging picture of the Journolist is that it served as a place where like-minded people who had great influence on how the media portrayed events were able to coordinate their story lines for the benefit of the Obama campaign.
Because if she proves to be a popular choice who doesn’t screw up too badly, she
could be really, really dangerous in the years to come.
Well, we now know, that, for some at least, I wasn't crazy. I was just not disciplined enough to curtail what this blog airs in order to conform with what many Journo-listers believed were the interests of the Obama campaign. Any delusions that Journo-List was not, in part, a collusory venture to shape the media narrative in ways to benefit Obama, above and beyond ferreting out the truth about any and all candidates, must now be abandoned. Ezra Klein has already been caught in a bald-faced lie about his discretion in picking members; and the notion that this was simply a water-cooler collection of journalistic thoughts is also belied by the emails now published by the Daily Caller.--------------------------------------------
