NewsBusters.org - Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Kathy Griffin Wants 'Dirty Lesbian' Suze Orman For President

Noel Sheppard — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 00:50:36 -0500

Comedienne Kathy Griffin believes it's "only a matter of time" before personal finance expert Suze Orman is President of the United States.

Why you may ask.

"Because you want a nice, financially focused, dirty lesbian running this country."

So said Griffin Friday during an absolutely preposterous conversation with fellow comedienne Joy Behar on the latter's HLN program (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript):

JOY BEHAR, HOST: The Christmas album, let's talk about that. Why is there no X-rated Christmas album really? You're not talking about Christmas in this album.
KATHY GRIFFIN, COMEDIENNE: Well, no. By the way, this, this CD is called "Suckin' It For The Holidays" really to grab your attention. The language in the CD is much worse than that, and I am out to offend a lot of groups. Let me just read you some of the titles.
BEHAR: Okay.
GRIFFIN: One of them is, it starts with "Happy Kwaanza" because I enjoy making fun of all religious groups. And I enjoy Kwaanza because as far as I know it's a made up holiday that's only about seven years old. And then there is a section about President Suze Orman because I believe that Suze Orman will and should be President.
BEHAR: Why?
GRIFFIN: It's only a matter of time. Because, I'll tell you why. Because you want a nice, financially focused, dirty lesbian running this country. And the bailout would not have happened, none of this Wall Street mess would have even happened if America could have been in the "Can I Afford It" segment of the Suze Orman Show.
BEHAR: Yes, it's true.
GRIFFIN: It's only a matter of time before she's President Orman.
BEHAR: Okay.
GRIFFIN: And then, but I do try to offend many people and try to let no one get out unscathed.

That's for sure. Do any of you feel unscathed?

AP, Covering ACORN La. Raid, Acts As If Only One Office Was Videotaped by O'Keefe and Giles

Tom Blumer — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 23:23:32 -0500

Did you know that activist filmmaker James O'Keefe and partner Hannah Giles made only one undercover video showing ACORN employees willing to assist them in illegal and human rights-violating activities?

Absent prior knowledge, that's the impression you would have upon reading the Associated Press's coverage of the latest development in the ACORN saga, namely the raid on the organization's New Orleans office by Louisiana state investigators.

AP writer Cain Burdeau only mentions O'Keefe's and Giles's videotaping efforts in Baltimore. The fact is that the pair have thus far presented the results of their efforts in five other locations, and may have more episodes in inventory for other opportune times.

Here are the first five paragraphs of Budreau's coverage (bold is mine):

Computers, records seized at ACORN offices in La.

State investigators raided ACORN offices on Friday, taking away computer hard drives and documents as part of a probe into alleged embezzlement and tax fraud when the organization's national headquarters was based in New Orleans.

"This is an investigation of everything - ACORN, the national organization, the local organization and all of its affiliated entities, specifically as it relates to any potential violations of Louisiana law," Assistant Attorney General David Caldwell said.

ACORN staff on the scene declined to comment, but an attorney for the group said in a statement the raid was prompted by allegations that former ACORN employees had removed or altered electronic documents and may do so in the future.

Attorney Pamela Marple said ACORN was cooperating and called the raid exhaustive, saying investigators wanted "virtually every document in the possession of ACORN and any related entity."

The raid was the latest development for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Videotapes released recently showed ACORN employees offering tax advice to two people in Baltimore posing as a prostitute and her pimp. The videos led Congress and state governments to cut funding for ACORN.

For the record, the other locations besides Baltimore where O'Keefe and Giles have shown results of their undercover visits are Washington DC, New York/Brooklyn, San Bernardino CA, San Diego, and Philadelphia.

In an article of over 400 words, Burdeau clearly could have included "and five other cities" in his paragraph that mentioned Baltimore. But he didn't. There's no good explanation for this failure other than a conscious effort to minimize the comprehensive nationwide significance of the O'Keefe's and Giles's work. It would appear that the AP would rather that as few readers as possible know that the intrepid pair have exposed and organization that from all appearances is corrupt to its very core, from sea to shining sea.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

Vintage Santelli: PelosiCare Threat to Recovery; Dow Climb Due to Market Bet on Fed Response to Unemployment

Jeff Poor — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:26:10 -0500

A rising Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) means better times are on the way, right? Not necessarily, according to CNBC CME floor reporter and tea party movement inspiration Rick Santelli.

Santelli made an appearance on CNBC's Nov. 6 "Fast Money," a show which the host, Melissa Lee, is skittish about a discussion that politics interferes with the market is a reality. Nonetheless, Santelli explained there so happens to be correlation between a rise in unemployment rates and the rise in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

"[I] think we're building a stairway to heaven in Dow prices on the back of paper and I think that, you know it seems kind of dire to me that 8 percent - 8,000, 9 percent - 9,000, 10.2 - 10,000," Santelli said. "I shudder to think where the unemployment rate is going to be at 11 and 12,000 in the Dow."

Lee challenged Santelli on his premise and applied the conventional wisdom that stocks are forward-looking indicators and that unemployment is a lagging indicator. That's not the case, according to Santelli, who expressed his concern about the pending health care legislation being debated in the House of Representatives under the leadership of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

"Not anymore," Santelli replied. "How can it be? What are they going to do in Washington at midnight tomorrow? How can it possibly be forward looking? We don't know what they're going to do with our money - with trillions of dollars, one-sixth of the economy and that's one example."

But here's how the equation works as Santelli explained - as long as unemployment continues to go up, the Federal Reserve will be reluctant to raise interest rates. And that's a bet investors are going to take - that as long as monetary policy remains easy, investors will continue to fuel the market.

"That's the game - that's why stocks keep going up on an unemployment rate, where the unemployment rate is important to America and investors that are invested in the stock market can still profit. Hey - you know, the last three recessions - what size was Google or Amazon? You know, let's look at who used to hire and how recessions used to be. You know, GM hired hundreds of thousands of people. What were their market capitalizations? Look at Google - how many people do they have? Do you really see this changing?"

Olbermann Suggests FNC Discriminates Against Non-White or Muslim Employees

Brad Wilmouth — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:03:47 -0500

On Friday’s Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann suggested that Fox News is a racist organization that would hold race or religion against its employees in awarding promotions, as he used the show’s "Worst Person" segment to slam Fox and Friends co-hosts Brian Kilmeade, Gretchen Carlson, and Peter Johnson, for raising questions about whether Muslims serving in the military should be treated with more attention. While every show in MSNBC’s primetime and morning lineups has a host who is white and non-Muslim, Olbermann suggested that the Fox and Friends hosts would have trouble succeeding at FNC if they were Muslim or non-white. Olbermann: "Since we’re asking questions, I have one for Carlson, Johnson, and Kilmeade. You guys ever wonder if you all succeeded inside a company like Fox mostly because you’re not Muslim or black or Asian or Hispanic?"

Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the "Worst Person in the World" segment from the Friday, November 6, Countdown show on MSNBC:

KEITH OLBERMANN: The runners up, Brian Kilmeade, Gretchen Carlson, and Peter Johnson of Fox Noise, on the Fort Hood case. Kilmeade: "Do you think it’s time for the military to have special debriefings of Muslim Army civil, uh, officers, anybody enlisted. Johnson: "You won’t countenance special screenings for Muslim soldiers, will ya?" Carlson: "Could it be that the military was exercising political correctness in not approaching him as seriously as they would have had he not been a Muslim?"

Since we’re asking questions, I have one for Carlson, Johnson, and Kilmeade. You guys ever wonder if you all succeeded inside a company like Fox mostly because you’re not Muslim or black or Asian or Hispanic?

ABC Frets: Plight of Muslim Soldiers Toughest Since Japanese-Americans in WWII

Brent Baker — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:49:37 -0500

ABC doubled the length of its evening newscast on Friday night and World News used its second half hour to suggest an exculpatory reason behind Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan's mass killing at Fort Hood -- as anchor Charles Gibson reasoned “treating the mentally wounded can be stressful” -- then to devote a story to the plight of Muslim soldiers: “It's not easy for anyone serving in the armed forces these days, but with America fighting Islamic enemies overseas, Muslim troops face a unique burden.” Reporter Bill Weir despaired:

The Pentagon has made a real concerted effort to create a military that is culturally sensitive and religiously tolerant, but Muslims in uniform today face a challenge not seen since Japanese-Americans fought in World War II. They taste suspicion from some fellow soldiers who question their loyalty and resentment from fellow Muslims opposed to both American wars.

Weir featured a Muslim soldier who lamented “our religion teaches better,” before Weir painted Muslim soldiers as victims of intolerance, highlighting the experience of one Muslim soldier who “began his overseas deployment on 9/11, and taunts followed him throughout his four-year enlistment.”

Weir acknowledged that “Major Hasan's motives are still unclear,” but he, nonetheless, recalled how “back in 2003 prosecutors alleged it was repeated taunting and religious ideology that led Sergeant Hasan Akbar to kill two of his commanding officers with a grenade.”

With “Stress Factor” as the on-screen heading, Gibson had set up the previous story from Martha Raddatz:

Many troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan bare the psychological scars of war, everything from anxiety to post-traumatic stress. The alleged Fort Hood gunman was a psychiatrist trained to help these soldiers. And while it's way too early to know why this rampage occurred, we do know that treating the mentally wounded can be stressful as well.

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the Muslim soldier story aired during the second half hour of the Friday, November 6 World News on ABC:

CHARLES GIBSON: Muslim groups here in the United States have moved quickly to condemn the rampage at Fort Hood after learning the alleged gunman was a practicing Muslim, born in the U.S. to Palestinian parents. The Council on American-Islamic Relations said no political or religious ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence. Organizations representing Muslims in the U.S. military also are denouncing the attack. It's not easy for anyone serving in the armed forces these days, but with America fighting Islamic enemies overseas, Muslim troops face a unique burden. Bill Weir joins us now. Bill?

BILL WEIR: Charlie, the Pentagon has made a real concerted effort to create a military that is culturally sensitive and religiously tolerant, but Muslims in uniform today face a challenge not seen since Japanese-Americans fought in World War II. They taste suspicion from some fellow soldiers who question their loyalty and resentment from fellow Muslims opposed to both American wars. At the Islamic community center in Killeen today, Friday prayers took place under a cloud of despair. This is where Major Nidal Hasan worshiped, alongside Fort Hood's small Muslim community, including Sergeant Fahad Kamal, just back from a 15-month tour of Afghanistan.

SERGEANT FAHAD KAMAL, U.S. MILITARY: I feel let down because we're better than this. Our religion teaches better, and it just makes me feel hurt and just, I just feel like we're much better individuals.

WEIR: Of the 1.4 million active service members around the world, just over 3,500 call themselves Muslims -- one-quarter of one percent. But members of their community say there are tens of thousands more who keep their faith to themselves, bowing to Mecca five times a day in private to avoid potential conflict with fellow troops.

SERGEANT MCCALL ABDULLAH: My last name's Abdullah, so it's really hard to run from it. It's right there on your BDUs, it says Abdullah.

WEIR: Sergeant McCall Abdullah began his overseas deployment on 9/11, and taunts followed him throughout his four-year enlistment.

ABDULLAH: You get called a camel jockey or a sand nigger or, you know, Haji or something like that.

WEIR: While Major Hasan's motives are still unclear, back in 2003, prosecutors alleged it was repeated taunting and religious ideology that led Sergeant Hasan Akbar to kill two of his commanding officers with a grenade. He was sentenced to death for that crime, and he became a symbol for those who want to believe a true Muslim could never choose America over Allah in a war against fellow Muslims. Former Gunnery Sergeant Jamal Gadani could not disagree more.

FORMER GUNNERY SERGEANT JAMAL GADANI, U.S. MILITARY: What some of these individuals do, is they try to take the Koran, the Muslim Koran, out of context and say, well, we can't kill other Muslims. Well, our mission is not to go kill other Muslims. We're there to find the bad guys, al-Qaeda.

ABDULLAH: We are all Americans, and we are all contributing, quite a few of us. And it would do best to remember that before putting people in a box.

GADANI: I feel embarrassed for the Muslim community. The feeling is that, I want to believe that it was the individual, not the religion, that made him do what he did.

WEIR: I asked Sergeant Abdullah how he managed to answer the call to prayer or march while fasting during Ramadan, he said, you just have to want it more than the rest of your guys in your platoon.

ABCNews.com video of Weir's story.

More Emerging Bias: Maddow Guest Suggests Lack of Health Funding Motivated Fort Hood Killer

Jack Coleman — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:24:06 -0500

When in doubt, cite the need for more government funding of health care. You won't find an argument on MSNBC.

Among the guests offering their perspectives about the Fort Hood massacre on Rachel Maddow's show last night was Salon.com national correspondent Mark Benjamin, who tried to downplay growing evidence that suspected assailant Nidal Malik Hasan was motivated by a jihadist's hatred of America --

BENJAMIN: There are people that believe that this is a person that was suffering some sort of secondary post-traumatic stress from treating soldiers and there are people that believe he was somehow influenced by Muslim extremism. I think it could be a combination of both. I certainly have met mental health care providers in the military who after sitting all day long and listening to some really disturbing tales, you know, when they're treating these soldiers coming back from Iraq, and in combination with the fact that they're overwhelmed, overworked, don't have the resources to do their jobs, become extremely stressed and frazzled. And there's no reason to not think that this could, this could ultimately lead to that kind of a conclusion.

How could Benjamin know only hours after the massacre whether Hasan did not have "the resources" for his job as an Army psychiatrist? If Benjamin was in possession of such specifics, he wasn't sharing them with Maddow's audience.

More along the same lines after Maddow spoke of the high rate of suicide in the military ("even outpacing the civilian rate," she pointed out, as if that's surprising) --

BENJAMIN: The other thing that's interesting is that there's this discussion about whether there's some ideological component and, you know, motivation to this person. You know, I'm not sure that's necessarily separate from the kind of treatment this person was doing. I mean, in other words, if you sit, I have literally interviewed hundreds of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11, and in private moments, when they tell you some of the things they were forced to do, and I'm not talking about, you know, intentional My Lai stuff, but, you know, things that happened in the vagaries of war, really, really, awful, awful things, it can affect you, it can turn people against the war, it can make you really think about that stuff. It's extremely difficult to think about, you know, to work on that all day long, imagine this doctor, who, that was his job.

By Benjamin's logic, he is also at risk of going berserk from the stress of interviewing "literally" hundreds of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and hearing of the horrors they experienced.

By the same logic, every blood-splattered doctor and nurse toiling in emergency rooms is one bad day from a rampage, along with every cop, every police reporter, every victim's advocate in court -- the entire country after 9/11, for that matter.

The difference here, as Mark Steyn pointed out today while filling in for Rush Limbaugh, is the apparent absence of trauma when it comes to Hasan, who was reportedly upset over his pending deployment to Iraq but had yet to serve there or in Afghanistan. Perhaps Hasan suffered from a new malady, Steyn suggested --"pre-post traumatic stress disorder."

Based on Benjamin's observations, I can see coming to a different conclusion about the wars we're fighting and the overarching conflict against radical Islam. If I am working as an Army psychiatrist, my patients might, for example, include soldiers who saw Afghan girls scarred from acid thrown in their faces as they walked to school. Who picked up the limbs after the mentally enfeebled were coerced into suicide bombings. Who returned fire at insurgents using children as human shields.

I might well conclude that as a soldier and single man of 39, as with Hasan, the only place for me is where I can serve to destroy the evil behind such malignancy.

Stay Tuned For Next Episode of Notables Quotables Comedy Show

NB Staff — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:55:33 -0500

Episode three of NewsBusters’ Notable Quotables comedy show is coming soon and as usual, the liberal media have provided plenty of great material.

Here’s a quick taste of what’s to come, enjoy!

In the meantime, check out last week's episode.

MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan: ‘Who Cares’ What the Religion of the Muslim Shooter Is?

Scott Whitlock — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:32:39 -0500

Morning Meeting host Dylan Ratigan on Friday appeared uncomfortable discussing the faith of the Muslim shooter who killed 12 people in Texas. In a tease for a segment on the subject, he noted that Major Nidal Hasan is being "described as a devout Muslim, mortified at being deployed to Iraq. Did that drive him to allegedly commit murder?" Ratigan quickly added, " And who cares what his religion was?"

Talking to Corey Saylor of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Ratigan offered a tortured, run-on question about the importance of Hasan’s Muslim faith: "Corey, it's very easy, considering, sort of, the history of the relations between our country and some nations- and some individual, really, of a Muslim faith. There's a very quick response or higher levels of anxiety for no reason other than because of the lesser familiarity."

Meandering his way to the end of this politically correct query, Ratigan concluded, "Is it appropriate to be looking at the- any sort of religious signals in a situation like this when you're clearly dealing with an American soldier, born in America, who enlisted again right out of high school?"

Speaking to FBI profiler Clint Van Zandt, Ratigan wondered what pressures Hasan may have been under:

RATIGAN: Yep. Clint Van Zandt, it's very easy to people to play pop psychiatrist or pop psychologist in a situation like this. Again, fear of war, abstractly, fear of going into combat abstractly would make anybody anxious, let alone working for as long as this man did as an Army psychiatrist, counseling men who lived and continued to live through war. Can you give us any indications, any commonalities of what happens when you're expose to do trauma like that repeatedly?

A transcript of the two exchanges, which occurred at 10:07am EST on November 6, follow:

9:59am

DYLAN RATIGAN: Still ahead here on the Morning Meeting, inside the mind of the alleged Fort Hood shooter, described as a devout Muslim, mortified at being deployed to Iraq. Did that drive him to allegedly commit murder? And who cares what his religion was?

10:07am

RATIGAN: Corey, it's very easy, considering, sort of, the history of the relations between our country and some nations- and some individual, really, of a Muslim faith. There's a very quick response or higher levels of anxiety for no reason other than because of the lesser familiarity. Is it appropriate to be looking at the- any sort of religious signals in a situation like this when you're clearly dealing with an American soldier, born in America, who enlisted again right out of high school?

COREY SAYLOR (Council on American-Islamic Relations): I think that it's really important that we, first of all, express our condolences to the victims of this tragedy and, which, those who are injured that they get better quickly. Right now, investigators need to do their jobs and look at everything. And the importance is we sew patience and sobriety in waiting for that investigation and let's hear what their conclusions are.

RATIGAN: Yep. Clint Van Zandt, it's very easy to people to play pop psychiatrist or pop psychologist in a situation like this. Again, fear of war, abstractly, fear of going into combat abstractly would make anybody anxious, let alone working for as long as this man did as an Army psychiatrist, counseling men who lived and continued to live through war. Can you give us any indications, any commonalities of what happens when you're expose to do trauma like that repeatedly?

CLINT VAN ZANDT (Former FBI profiler):Well, number one, there's going to be hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of men and women who have gone through this all the time. Dr. Hasan was not being sent in as a ground troop. He was being sent in to help care for those psychologically injured during the course of war, just like he had treated them in the states. Dylan, this was a contract that he had with the U.S. government. You and I and all of the taxpayers agree to pay his way through medical school with the understanding that he would stay in the military and that he would perform his duty, whatever the military said that was. So here, it appears we have a man who may have been in conflict between his duty to his country and his duty to his religion. And he, apparently, sided with one as opposed to the other and made the decision he was not going to go to Iraq. He was not going to be part of any action that saw the lives of Muslims taken in a combat situation and he was going to violate the terms of the agreement he had with this government.

NBC Analyst Unsure Ft. Hood Shooting Was Terrorism

Kyle Drennen — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:27:24 -0500

Appearing on the Dr. Nancy program on MSNBC Friday, NBC News terrorism analyst Roger Cressy warned against labeling the mass shooting at Ft. Hood as terrorism, despite the apparent radical views of the shooter: “We’ve heard some family references that he was being criticized for his Muslim faith, that’s all we know right now....It’s still premature to draw the terrorism conclusion.”

Prior to Cressy’s assessment, host Dr. Nancy Snyderman spoke with Dr. Stevan Hobfoll, director of the Traumatic Stress Center at Rush University Medical Center and asked about the mental health of the attacker, Major Nidal Hasan. Hobfoll made no hesitation describing the shooting as a terrorist act: “Strangely enough, terrorism is not in itself an area – an act of mental illness. I think this was a Jihadist act, it’s certainly psychologically abnormal what he did, but that doesn’t mean that he had any psychological disorder, per se.”

Snyderman then turned to Cressy, citing his unwillingness to use the terrorism label: “Roger, I have heard you express caution that we not say this is terrorism, but that there was, obviously, despaired anger.” She went on to compare Hasan to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh: “I’m thinking of Timothy McVeigh, an American born on this soil, filled with despair, full of anger, but nonetheless, we labeled him a terrorist pretty darn early.”

Cressy argued that the two situations were not analogous: “Well Nancy, we did, because his was a political act. I mean the – the traditional definition of terrorism is premeditated violence for political purposes against noncombatants. And what McVeigh did in Oklahoma City was, he was trying to send a political message with attacking the Murrah building. What we don’t know yet with Major Hasan is whether or not he was trying to do the same.”

Another NBC analyst, former FBI profiler Clint Van Zandt, was more willing to acknowledge the terrorism aspect of the attack: “I appreciate that we haven’t yet identified these internet postings to him....one posting that said if a suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard, that would be considered a significant victory. Should these postings ultimately be attributed to him, that sounds like some ongoing planning that he actually acted out yesterday.”

Here is a full transcript of the discussion:

12:03PM

NANCY SNYDERMAN: Well, today Major Nidal Hasan’s family is expressing grief over the shootings, just releasing this statement, quote, ‘We are shocked and saddened by the terrible events at Ft. Hood. We send the families of the victims our most heartfelt sympathies. We are filled with grief for the families of today’s victims. Our family loves America. We are proud of our country, and saddened by today’s tragedy.’
Investigators have learned that Major Hasan cleaned out his apartment days ago, telling a neighbor that he was being deployed today. And that has certainly raised questions about the attack. Let’s bring in our team of experts. Dr. Stevan Hobfoll, he is the director of the Traumatic Stress Center at Rush University Medical Center. Retired Army Colonel and military analyst Jack Jacobs will be with us. NBC terrorism analyst Roger Cressy and NBC analyst Clint Van Zandt, he’s a former FBI profiler and author of ‘Facing Down Evil.’

I think I want to sort of start with the basics, and Stevan, I’m going to start with you. Physicians in the military are, in many ways, sort of the top rung. And as a major, certainly an officer. Who guards, who profiles, who makes sure that the physicians taking care of people are, themselves, mentally healthy?

STEVAN HOBFOLL: Well, they are guarded and they are checked for mental health and it’s a part of the process. But strangely enough, terrorism is not in itself an area – an act of mental illness. I think this was a Jihadist act, it’s certainly psychologically abnormal what he did, but that doesn’t mean that he had any psychological disorder, per se. And that’s always a difficulty that we have that we think there must be a psychological disorder involved with doing something that is – the act is so abnormal.

SNYDERMAN: Roger, I have heard you express caution that we not say this is terrorism, but that there was, obviously, despaired anger. But then let me ask you about what the obvious is when we talk about domestic terrorism. And I’m thinking of Timothy McVeigh, an American born on this soil, filled with despair, full of anger, but nonetheless, we labeled him a terrorist pretty darn early.

ROGER CRESSY: Well Nancy, we did, because his was a political act. I mean the – the traditional definition of terrorism is premeditated violence for political purposes against noncombatants. And what McVeigh did in Oklahoma City was, he was trying to send a political message with attacking the Murrah building. What we don’t know yet with Major Hasan is whether or not he was trying to do the same.

We’re hearing contradictory and uncorroborated reports about potential postings on the internet. We’ve heard some family references that he was being criticized for his Muslim faith, that’s all we know right now. So until the investigators can determine through their analysis of his cell phone calls, his computers, some of his other things, the data, they’ll determine whether or not there was something that politically motivated him to commit mass murder. It’s still premature to draw the terrorism conclusion.

SNYDERMAN: Clint, as we look at someone who was motivated enough to plan this out, he had to have some forethought to walk in, armed, knowing that there was a mission that he individually wanted to accomplish. And, you know, as a doctor, I know dumb doctors, but you have to have some smarts to get through medical school and through residency. Does he fit a different kind of profile?

CLINT VAN ZANDT: Well, when we look at suicidal ideation, many times we’ll see someone who will give away their belongings before they commit some type of terrible act. In this case, what you just pointed Dr. Nancy, about him giving away furniture and personal belongings at least two full weeks before he was going to deploy, suggests there may have been some ongoing – ongoing planning.

Relatives have said, you know, he really didn’t like to be around weapons and firearms and yet this is someone who appears to have had two personal handguns, a semiautomatic and some other weapon, that he was able to use and with the number of people that he shot, he had to reload two, three times perhaps. That takes a little bit of planning, too. It takes a little bit of practice, Dr. Nancy, to understand how to use a weapon in that regard.

And, although I appreciate that we haven’t yet identified these internet postings to him, we only know that there’s somebody who uses his name, there is one, should this be him, there was one posting that said if a suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard, that would be considered a significant victory. Should these postings ultimately be attributed to him, that sounds like some ongoing planning that he actually acted out yesterday.

TVNewser: 'Could Glenn Beck Take Over Oprah's Syndicated Slot?'

Noel Sheppard — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:35:41 -0500

Deadline Hollywood shocked the entertainment world Thursday when it predicted Oprah Winfrey would soon give up her syndicated television program to move it to her OWN cable network.

On Friday, the website TVNewser wondered if this might open the door for Fox News sensation Glenn Beck to move into such a syndicated arrangement.

This was on the heals of the New York Times lavishing praise on Beck for being the new Oprah when it comes to helping the sales of fiction writers.

Newser's Chris Ariens wrote:

With the news that Oprah Winfrey may take her daily talk show away from broadcast affiliates and to her own OWN cable network, that got us wondering: should Glenn Beck, now the #2 show on cable despite airing in he afternoons, be Oprah's syndicated replacement?
Beck is well-rounded. Between his #1 best-selling books and comedy shows he's a three-dimensional talent that could easily adapt to daytimes. He could also use his radio audience to promote to local affiliates. [...]
Beck is locked in to a multi-year deal with Fox News which would probably keep him from jumping anytime soon. His show premiered in January, and quickly shot past all competitors and even programs on his own channel, which air later in the evening to larger available audiences.

Amazing. Just months ago, Beck was the target of an organized smear campaign by detractors who sought to eliminate all of his sponsors, and now he's rumored to be the next Oprah Winfrey.

The folks in the leftosphere as well as the shills that sit around all day listening to every syllable Beck utters praying for a salacious tidbit that might bring him down must be hating all the accolades he's suddenly getting.

Isn't it marvelous?

Newsweek.com Skips Obama’s Snub of Berlin Wall, Pretends He’s Already Been There

Scott Whitlock — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:11:46 -0500

A Newsweek.com article on Tuesday celebrated historic speeches by U.S. Presidents at the Berlin Wall, somehow ignoring the fact that Barack Obama has decided not to go to Germany to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the collapse of communism. At the same time, the piece, by Anita Kirpalani, pretended that President Obama has made such a trip.

The article, entitled, "Ich Bin Ein Speechmaker: Historic speeches by visiting American presidents have left an outsize footprint on Berlin," listed visits by John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Obama’s entry insisted, "President: Barack Obama- Date: July 24, 2008." This was prior to his election and was only in the city of Berlin, not at the wall. The article notes these facts. So, why list him as President when he wasn't? The rest of the piece is vague on this point.

Kirpalani began, "Five American presidents delivered addresses at the Berlin Wall and, 20 years after its fall, the city is still considered a prime venue for American presidents to deliver important speeches." No mention is made of the President’s decision to snub German President Angela Merkel and not attend the upcoming 20th anniversary ceremonies.

Further, Kirpalani asserted, "...[Obama’s] plea for the fall of all walls echoed every earlier presidential speech, and the crowd of 200,000 was more than four times the number that attended Reagan's 1987 speech."

However, in a November 3 column, National Review editor Rich Lowry pointed out:

Obama famously made a speech in Berlin during last year's campaign, but at an event devoted to celebrating himself as the apotheosis of world hopefulness. He said of 1989, "a wall came down, a continent came together, and history proved that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one."

The line was typical Obama verbal soufflé, soaring but vulnerable to collapse upon the slightest jostling from logic or historical fact. The wall came down only after the free world resolutely stood against the Communist bloc. Rather than a warm-and-fuzzy exercise in global understanding, the Cold War was another iteration of the 20th century's long war between totalitarianism and Western liberalism. The West prevailed on the back of American strength.

Newsweek.com's full entry on Obama's visit:

President: Barack Obama
Date: July 24, 2008
Obama hadn't even been elected when he went to Berlin during his 2008 campaign. For that reason, the Germans did not allow him to speak at the Brandenburg Gate—they reserve it for presidential speeches. But his plea for the fall of all walls echoed every earlier presidential speech, and the crowd of 200,000 was more than four times the number that attended Reagan's 1987 speech.

In a 20th anniversary piece on the fall of the Berlin Wall, the very least Newsweek could do is acknowledge the bewildering decision by Obama to turn down an invitation to Germany.

Tea Partiers 'Stormed' Congress, But Pro-ObamaCare 'Activists' Simply 'Staged a Sit-in'

Ken Shepherd — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:00:50 -0500

Word choice can be a subtle but effective way in which the media colorfully editorialize on the news, skewing the perceptions of readers in one direction or another. Take Washington Post's Philip Rucker, who did masterful job in skewing his 19-paragaph-long page A4 story "Activists bring 'tea party' to Capitol Hill" in favor of ObamaCare proponents while smearing conservatives in a negative light.

Rucker's labeling bias was a thread woven through the entire piece, starting with the lead paragraph (emphasis mine):

With the stage set for a historic House vote on health-care reform this weekend, an estimated 10,000 conservative activists descended on Capitol Hill on Thursday for a campaign-style rally in a last-ditch effort to defeat a bill they demonized as "Pelosi-Care."

In other words, Rucker tells readers, the Democrats, poised to make history, are threatened by a "last-ditch" effort by conservatives driven to defeat a bill they've unfairly maligned.

But the starkest contrast was how Rucker described how "hundreds of activists stormed congressional offices in an attempt to turn wavering Democrats against the [Democratic health care] bill" yet found "nine pro-reform activists" who "had staged a sit-in the seventh-floor office of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman."

The tea partiers "unleashed their ire on Speaker Nancy Pelosi," while the Lieberman protesters simply came "demanding that he return campaign contributions from health insurers."

The message is clear: the Lieberman protesters, who were arrested with unlawful entry of the Connecticut independent's office, were civilly disobedient, while the tea partiers -- no arrests within their ranks reported -- were a seething mob.

LAT Jumps on PC Bandwagon, Ignores Islamic Beliefs of Ft. Hood Shooter

Lachlan Markay — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:59:10 -0500

As reports of the Fort Hood shooting began to pour in yesterday, numerous news outlets neglected to mention that the shooter is a Muslim. Either the potential import of this fact was completely lost on these journalists, or they omitted the shooter's Muslim affiliations out of a concern for political correctness.

CBS and NBC both omitted the shooter's faith in their East Coast feeds last night, as reported by Brent Baker. The Los Angeles Times left key facts out of its report, published at 9:46 EST (which has since been edited), even though other other media outlets had reported them. Among these was that shooter Nidal Malik Hasan was Muslim, and that he had previously expressed on an Internet forum affinity for suicide bombers.

The Associated Press reported at 8:15 EST that Hasan had "come to the attention" of Army officials at least six months ago for these Internet posts.

The Times also noted the high number of suicides at Fort Hood this year, suggesting--though not stating outright--that the shooter could have been under tremendous mental strain.

Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the Army’s deputy chief of staff, has been leading an effort to reduce the number of Army suicides, which has climbed sharply this year, possibly as a result from long and repeated deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Three of the four brigades of the 1st Calvary Division are in Iraq. The three brigades — the first, second and third — are on their third Iraq tour. The division’s newest brigade, the fourth, has done two tours in Iraq, returning most recently in June.

Ft. Hood also is home to three of the brigades of the 4th Infantry Division. The fourth brigade is now in Afghanistan. The first brigade has done three tours in Iraq, returning most recently in March. The second brigade has also done three tours, returning most recently in September.

The Times did not mention, however, that Hasan was about to go on his first tour, a fact disclosed by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson at roughly 6 PM EST. Hasan was reportedly very upset about his upcoming deployment, but the Times gives the impression that the mental strain endured by servicemen overseas for extended tours could be a possible motive, failing to note that Hasan had not been deployed.

As Patterico reported last night, "the L.A. Times story on the shooting has no mention of the shooter’s religion, his alleged rants against U.S. involvement in Iraq, his alleged approval of suicide bombings, or the allegations that he was shouting something in Arabic as he shot." These are all vital facts to the investigation, as they may indicate motive in Hasan's slaughter of 13 at the base.

With the exception of the shooter's Muslim faith and his "alleged approval of suicide bombings," these facts were not widely reported on until today. But as of 1:10 PM EST the Times still does not mention the many new--and disturbing--facts that have come to light.

According to military personnel present during the shooting, he shouted "Allahu Akbar"--Arabic for "God is great"--before opening fire.

The Times also leaves out reports from a retired Ft. Hood colonel who claims he heard Hasan say he was "almost sort of happy" about the shooting of an Army recruiter in Little Rock, Ark (see Patterico post).

NPR reported today that Hasan gave a lecture on the proper Muslim ritual for the beheading of an infidel. "It seemed to be his own beliefs. That’s what a lot of people thought," one attendee stated, adding, "people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about 'is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?' "

While none of these facts are proverbial smoking guns in the country's efforts to discover the motives for the shooting, they all indicate a strong resentment of the military, and an affinity for anti-American violence. They are at least worthy of a mention in reporting the story.

Perhaps the Times will notice these new--and revealing--facts as they come to light and continue to update their story accordingly. Readers only ask that they own up to their politically correct instincts and admit when they left out facts critical to understanding the incident.

Facts have steadily streamed in, and there was an air of confusion shortly after the shooting. But the Times shied away from covering some of the more damning details of the shooter's life, even when those facts were reported by other sources. It seems that the Times joined the ranks of CBS and NBC in choosing the politically correct avenue rather than reporting the inconvenient facts that could give readers insight into the shooter's motives.

Hollywood Morality: Teen Sex on TV Okay Because Real-Life Teens Do It

Colleen Raezler — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:58:11 -0500

According to actress Sandra Bernhard, no "kid is going to watch something about sex and then run out immediately and do it."

Bernhard commented during a Nov. 5 segment on CNN's "Joy Behar Show" that focused on the upcoming threesome episode of CW's "Gossip Girl."

Behar asked Bernhard and her fellow panelists, actresses Aisha Tyler and Fran Drescher, what they thought about the Parents Television Council call for CW affiliates to pull the episode which reportedly contains a threesome scene.

"I don't think any kid is going to watch something about sex and then run out immediately and do it. I mean they may be titillated by it, they may find it, oh this is ooh," claimed Bernhard.

Tyler admitted to being a fan of the show and was even more dismissive of PTC's concerns.

"Let me just break a piece of news to everybody here. If you don't know, teenagers have sex. I don't know if anybody - like, they do it, and you know, first of all, we are not encouraging them to do it, but they do," Tyler told Behar and her co-panelists. "And if you hide it and you ignore it and you fake it and act like your kid is not doing it you are doing them and yourself a disservice because kids have sex."

But what Tyler and Bernhard ignored is that depictions like the "Gossip Girl" threesome feed the perception that "everyone is doing it" and create expectations of teen sexual behavior.

"Perhaps the greatest problem is that what's presented on the screen offers a skewed version of reality to many young people you lack the life experience to understand just how preposterous some the content is," wrote Carol Platt Liebau about sexual content on television in her book "Prude."

Very few sexual escapades featured on television show the physical and emotional consequences of early sexual behavior, a point Fran Drescher was the only one to make on Behar's show.

"In the episode is there a downside to these kids - is there some kind of a lesson?" the actress asked.

Nobody could answer Drescher's question, but given the glamorized view of teen sex the show has previously depicted, chances are this episode will show the "titillating" behavior and little of the damage left in its wake.

Unemployment Surges to 10.2 Percent, CNN Asks About Second Stimulus

Julia A. Seymour — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:57:02 -0500

President Obama lobbied for government stimulus almost as soon as he took office. In order to gain passage of that $787 billion spending spree, Obama warned of economic "catastrophe" including double-digit unemployment.

Roughly 9 months later, we now have proof that those billions of taxpayer dollars spent didn't stop the unemployment rate from soaring to 10.2 percent. Still, that failure didn't prevent one CNN anchor from asking if a second stimulus might be needed.

CNN business correspondent Christine Romans announced the latest jobs numbers on Nov. 6 during "American Morning. She said, "The unemployment rate is 10.2 percent. It is worse than economists had been expecting - 10.2 percent - we have hit double-digits on the unemployment rate now and this is the highest since the early 1980s. The number of jobs lost: 190,000 jobs lost in the month. That is a little worse than we had thought."

Following Romans' report, CNN anchors John Roberts and Kiran Chetry consulted author William Cohan, a contributor to The DailyBeast.com and Bloomberg, and Diane Brady, senior editor of BusinessWeek magazine. Both guests were concerned about the rising rate of unemployment and Cohan said he didn't see "anything optimistic about these numbers."

Obama administration officials said that with a stimulus package unemployment wouldn't rise above 8 percent, but neither anchor pointed out that failure of the massive spending package.

Instead Roberts asked, "So I guess Bill, the question many people are asking this morning is ‘Wow. How long do we have to live in fear? How long until things really start to turn around? And what about this idea of a second stimulus, purely to create jobs?'"

Cohan replied, "Well I think the administration may have to come to terms with that very shortly. I know there's been a lot of talk about it - the question is can we afford that as a country vs. can we afford not to do it. I mean, we have huge budget deficits. We have a huge $12 trillion that the Fed and the Treasury has pumped into the economy already. Uh, you know this is not an easy problem."

The Associated Press and other outlets have reported that a "second stimulus" is likely on the way, but will be done in "stealth" mode. Time magazine predicted "More stimulus is coming, but it just won't be called stimulus," because public opinion has turned against it.

The last time unemployment was at 10.2 percent was in 1983 under President Ronald Reagan.

The Business & Media Institute recently released a Special Report about network coverage of unemployment in 2009 under Obama and 1982 under Reagan. BMI found reporters desperately looking for silver linings in 2009, but consistently showing the "worst of times" in 1982 with people living out of trucks under bridges or collecting free food at a food bank. Networks reports were 13 times more negative in their treatment of Reagan compared to Obama.

Robert Reich: ObamaCare Won't Cut Costs OR Improve Health Care

Noel Sheppard — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:25:35 -0500

Former Clinton Labor Secretary and current Obama economic adviser Robert Reich believes healthcare legislation currently being debated on Capitol Hill "won't offer most Americans any appreciable decline in the cost of their health insurance nor clear improvement in the efficiency or quality of the health care they receive."

Contrary to what President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and their media minions are shamefully telling the public, the current bill results in "extra costs [that] will be borne by those Americans who will be required to buy insurance but won't qualify for federal assistance, along with Medicare beneficiaries who will be paying more and receiving less."

Maybe more importantly given Friday's announcement that the nation's unemployment rate jumped to 10.2 percent in October, Reich believe's President Obama is doing America a disservice by focusing all his attention on healthcare reform instead of trying to create jobs.

Although Reich posted this at his blog on Sunday, I could find no major media references to his rather startling commentary (h/t Glenn Reynolds):

I sincerely hope America gets genuine health reform and I hope it's stronger than what's emerging in the Senate...I worry, though, that Obama's strategy may turn out to be a mistake comparable to Clinton's overemphasis on deficit reduction. Obama's focus on health care rather than jobs, when the economy is still so fragile and unemployment moving toward double digits, could make it appear that the administration has its priorities confused. While affordable health care is critically important to Americans, making a living is more urgent. Yet the administration's efforts to date on this more basic concern have been neither particularly visible nor coherent.

The current rate of unemployment would have been even higher were it not for the federal stimulus package, but the stimulus should have been much larger. Especially with the states still cutting back on spending and raising taxes, the federal stimulus will be barely enough to keep unemployment from hitting 11 percent by the middle of 2010. Yet as the rate of unemployment continued to rise faster and higher than the White House anticipated, Obama could not return to Congress to seek a larger stimulus. He was spending political capital on health care. [...]

While health care reform, if done right, can help American families stay afloat in the economy, the current bills won't offer most Americans any appreciable decline in the cost of their health insurance nor clear improvement in the efficiency or quality of the health care they receive, and those who will benefit won't see the benefits until 2014 at the earliest. [...]

That and other deals cut with industry -- including promises to Big Pharma that Medicare wouldn't use its bargaining clout to reduce drug prices, to the AMA that doctors wouldn't have to face larger cuts in Medicare reimbursement rates, and to private insurers that the White House wouldn't fight hard for a public insurance option -- are likely to make the resulting reform far more costly than it would be otherwise. These extra costs will be borne by those Americans who will be required to buy insurance but won't qualify for federal assistance, along with Medicare beneficiaries who will be paying more and receiving less. These people may not know they're indirectly paying the costs of buying off these industries, but they'll know they're getting shafted (Republicans will be sure to make them aware, even though the GOP has a much longer record of shafting the middle class for the benefit of big business). [...]

If Obama and the Democrats lose one or both houses of Congress in the midterms, it will be because the president learned only the most superficial lesson of the Clinton years. Health-care reform is critically important. But when one out of six Americans is unemployed or underemployed, getting the nation back to work is more so.

Although I don't agree with Reich's stimulus ideas, his point about job creation being far more important than healthcare reform at this time in history is spot on.

That ObamaCare-loving media choose to ignore such logic is totally mind-boggling.

Buried: NY Times Plunks GOP Protest In Middle of A-15 Story Titled 'House Democrats Seek Allies for Health Care Vote'

Tim Graham — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:01:36 -0500

While the Washington Post ran a full news story by Philip Rucker on the conservative Capitol Hill rally on page 4 on Friday, The New York Times buried it with just six paragraphs – smack dab in in the middle of a story on A-15 headlined "House Democrats Seek Allies for Health Care Vote."

The story by Times reporters Carl Hulse and David M. Herszenhorn focused mostly on how Democrats were organizing their own caucus and gaining endorsements from the AARP, the American Medical Association, and the American Cancer Society.

In paragraph eight, the Times duo finally devoted some 230 words to the conservative rally that drew thousands of Americans from across the country:

While Democrats sought to build support, Republicans engaged in an equally determined effort to block the measure, with House Republicans lining up to address thousands of conservatives gathered at the West Front of the Capitol. No House Republican is expected to vote for the measure, meaning its entire support has to come from within the 258-member Democrat caucus.

At the rally, initiated by Representative Michele Bachmann, a Minnesota Republican, those attending were encouraged to press their lawmakers to vote against the bill. Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, called it the "greatest threat to freedom that I have seen in the 19 years I’ve been in Washington."

"Let’s get to work," Representative Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, exhorted the crowd. "We’ve got a lot of work to do between now and Saturday."

Arriving from around the country, the opponents were imbued with conservative principles and skepticism of the federal government’s ability to administer health care programs.

"The government couldn’t even get the shots out," said Karen Ambrose of Sunbury, Ohio, ridiculing the government’s efforts to vaccinate people for the H1N1 virus as an example of what government-run health care would look like. "Let’s just get the government out of all this."

After the rally, the Capitol police arrested a dozen protesters on charges of causing a disturbance at offices of Ms. Pelosi in the Cannon Building.

The reporters made no mention of the nine far-left Code Pink protesters arrested in Senator Joe Lieberman’s office. On the bright side, the Times didn’t find wacky signs and suggest they represented the entire crowd, as reporters sometimes do.

The rally was briefly mentioned in paragraph two, as Hulse and Herszenhorn anticipated Nancy Pelosi’s accelerated "landmark vote" for enhanced statism:

Democratic vote counters, working as thousands of conservative protesters chanted "kill the bill" outside the Capitol and later swarmed through Congressional office buildings, said they did not yet have the necessary 218 confirmed supporters. But they said they were confident they would exceed that total in time for a landmark vote set for Saturday on the $1.1 trillion, 10-year health plan that many Democrats have sought for years.

The rally was also mentioned on a front-page promo, which carried the classic Times bias of Democrats vs. conservatives:

Readying for Health Care Vote

As House Democratic leaders worked furiously to secure the final votes for weekend approval of a sweeping health care overhaul, conservatives turned out to protest the measure.

David Herszenhorn’s blog post on the rally yesterday, on the "Prescriptions" blog, interviewed more average Americans – and he suggested they were not very diverse:

It’s a generally older crowd, many in their 50s and 60s, predominantly, white, and many self-identified as Christians. They are fiercely conservative and deeply skeptical of the government, many of them adamantly opposed to abortion rights.

He also suggested they’re just repeating Fox News mantras:

Mr. Hershberger, like many of the demonstrators, repeated some of the most common conservative and Republican talking points heard repeatedly on Fox News. "It’s not bipartisan," he said, standing outside the Capitol wearing a Texas Longhorns baseball cap. "They are doing it behind closed doors." He added: "It’s going to drive us into a super-deficit."

UPDATE: Appearing with and debating MRC President Brent Bozell on Friday morning's Fox & Friends, New York Times columnist Charles Blow insisted conservative rallies are being over-covered. Did he see today's newspaper?

The implication that this doesn’t get covered is ridiculous. Yesterday in the afternoon, when it was happening, it was the lead story on Fox News. It was the display story on NYTimes.com. It was the display story on MSNBC.com. It’s everywhere. You do a basic search, tea party search – thousands of hits on the New York Times just in the last 30 minutes, last 30 days alone. It’s everywhere. I think it gets more coverage than it needs – especially when it was organized by Michelle Bachmann, when every time she opens her mouth she makes Sarah Palin sound like the president of Mensa. The idea that we’re not covering this enough is ridiculous to me.

Blow exaggerated just a little that you'd get "thousands of hits" from the New York Times on tea parties. A quick Nexis search of the last 30 days finds a modest seven news stories, editorials and book reviews mentioning (often disparaging) tea-party protests.

ABC’s Diane Sawyer Repeats Concern of Wishing Muslim Shooter’s ‘Name was Smith’; All Three Networks ID Hasan's Faith

Scott Whitlock — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:56:31 -0500

All three morning shows on Friday identified the man who killed 12 at an Army base in Texas as a Muslim. However, Good Morning America’s Diane Sawyer repeated a concern from Thursday’s World News: "...We heard Martha Raddatz say last night that the wife of a soldier said ‘I wish his name had been Smith,’ so no one would have a reflexive question about [a religious motive]."

In comparison, on Thursday’s CBS Evening News and NBC’s Nightly News both programs failed to reveal the religious faith of Hasan. GMA, as well as CBS’s Early Show and NBC’s Today, did not shy away from politically incorrect details, such as the surveillance footage of Major Nidal Malik Hasan in full Muslim garb in the hours before the shooting. Correspondent Brian Ross dug up information and informed, "In this internet posting earlier this year, Nadal Hasan compared suicide bombers to G.I.’s who saved their colleagues by throwing themselves on a grenade."

The Early Show’s David Martin explained, "He is an American citizen said to be of Jordanian decent and a life-long Muslim." He then added, "However, there’s a retired colonel who served with Hasan, has been quoted as saying that he heard Hasan react with glee to a news report that several American soldiers had been killed by a suicide bomber."

All three morning shows highlighted reports that the killer allegedly yelled "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great" in Arabic") prior to the shooting. Ross noted that a neighbor claimed Hasan had previously given away copies of the Koran and attempted to get rid of his property. News anchor Chris Cuomo reported live from Killeen, Texas and added that Hasan had been "disciplined for preaching to patients and colleagues about [Islam]."

On NBC’s Today, co-host Meredith Vieira talked to General Barry McCaffrey and worried about possible harassment:

MEREDITH VIEIRA: There were also reports, General, that Hasan had told family members that he had been harassed by members of the military, because of his Muslim faith. Is that common?

GEN. BARRY MCCAFFREY: Well of course again, factually it’s hard to know what’s going on. But the quick answer is, of course not. You know the Army is one of the most diverse institutions in the country. When you look around you see men and women of all faiths and colors in command positions.

Both GMA and Early Show also discussed this possible angle, as well as whether Hasan somehow had post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), despite having never gone to Iraq. Co-host Robin Roberts asked Raddatz: "But we're hearing talk that [PTSD] could be a factor with the suspected shooter, even though he has never been deployed?" On the Early Show, Dr. Michael Welner talked to guest host Debbye Turner-Bell and theorized about Hasan, who was an Army psychiatrist and treating people:

DR. MICHAEL WELNER: A person who is treating people with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is in an environment where they verbalize, so he’s dealing with victims who may have verbalized a tremendous amount of resentment and anger for people he identified with. And we know about mass shooters, that they are alienated and it is their alienation that enables mass shooting. You have to hate everyone to feel comfortable killing anyone. And a random mass shooting, you embrace the possibility, and as an educated professional, that anyone may die.

A transcript of the Brian Ross report on the shooter, which aired at 7:11am EST, follows:

DIANE SAWYER: And as we search for more clues about this man, who he might be, why he might have done this, we turn to ABC News chief investigative correspondent Brian Ross. Brian?

BRIAN ROSS: Good morning, Diane. Well, as we learn more about Major Hasan, it's clear that he was about to be deployed to Iraq. He was suffering from some of the same stress that he was trained as an army psychiatrist to treat. His family says he complained about being called a camel jockey by others in the military. And was reportedly being treated himself for problems with alcohol. Although Hasan had just been promoted to major in May, his family and a congressman briefed on the case, say he had hired a lawyer, to help him get out of the Army.

REP. MICHAEL MCCAUL (R-TX): Apparently he became very disgruntled in the mission in Afghanistan, voiced that to a lot of his colleagues.

ROSS: In this internet posting earlier this year, Nadal Hasan compared suicide bombers to G.I.’s who saved their colleagues by throwing themselves on a grenade.

BRAD GARRETT (Fmr. Special agent, FBI): Just keep in mind, mass killers, pretty much know they're going to die. And they tend to want to take as many people with them as they can at a shooting.

ROSS: Hasan, an American citizen of Palestinian descent, went to college at Virginia Tech. And studied medicine at the military’s medical school.

FAIZUL KHAN (Islamic Society of Washington Area): I found him very quiet and have a nice, quiet disposition about him. Very all willing to talk. [sic] A humble guy. And I find him very interested in learning more about his religion.

ROSS: Hasan worked as a psychiatrist at the Walter Reed Military Hospital in Washington for six years until this July.

MCCAUL: Had a poor performance evaluation. Was transferred to Fort Hood Military Base. And while there, received a lot of advanced training in weapons, shooting classes.

ROSS: Overnight, federal agents carried out search warrants at Hasan's apartment outside Fort Hood. A neighbor told ABC News earlier this week that Hasan had been giving away his furniture, and copies of the Koran, as he apparently planned to dispose of all his belongings. In a statement, members of Hasan's family said, they sent their victims heartfelt sympathies. So far, there's been no indication that Hasan is connected to terror organizations. And Muslim groups around the nation are condemning the attack, Diane.

SAWYER: Yes, we heard Martha Raddatz say last night that the wife of a soldier said "I wish his name had been Smith," so no one would have a reflexive question about that. But they are sure that he never traveled overseas. They traced everything they can trace to see if there were any connection.

ROSS: He had a brother that lived in the occupied territories outside of Israel, in Palestine and Ramallah. He had never been deployed overseas. There's no known connection to any al Qaeda group at all.

MRC-TV: Brent Bozell Double Feature: 'Hannity' and 'Fox & Friends'

NB Staff — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:27:56 -0500

Media Research Center President and NewsBusters Publisher Brent Bozell appeared on "Hannity" last night and talked about the Fort Hood shooting as well as the conservative rally at the Capitol yesterday which drew thousands on short notice. [see video embedded at right]

Regarding the latter Bozell quipped, "Spontaneous combustion! This wasn't an instant tea party. This was a coffee urn exploding."

"There's something huge going on out there. And if people on Capitol Hill don't want to pay attention to them, fine, they'll become private citizens just like I am," Bozell added.

As to the Fort Hood shooting, Bozell noted that the attack reminds us "that we're up against some pretty awful stuff in this world today, some pretty evil stuff."

This morning, Bozell returned to Fox News's New York headquarters to chat with the hosts of "Fox & Friends."

You can watch the entire interview in the embedded video below the page break:

Emerging Bias: Newsweek Claims Fort Hood Shooter Exposed Overstretched 'Military on the Brink'

Tim Graham — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:26:07 -0500

In a case of trying to find liberal angles on a tragic shooting, switching the focus of blame and judgment from the mass murderer to the military, Newsweek's Andrew Bast asked on the magazine's blog The Human Condition: "Is Fort Hood A Harbinger? Nidal Malik Hasan May Be A Symptom of a Military On the Brink."

So the shooting is the Pentagon's fault? And they may inspire more shootings to come? Newsweek is going there:

Details remained murky, but at least 13 are dead and 30 wounded in a killing spree that may momentarily remind us of a reality that most Americans can readily forget: soldiers and their families are living, and bending, under a harrowing and unrelenting stress that will not let up anytime soon. And the U.S. military could well be reaching a breaking point as the president decides to send more troops into Afghanistan.

It’s almost humorous to watch Bast write "details remain murky," but I’m going to venture forth and start spinning the MoveOn.org anti-war line:

It's hard to draw too many conclusions right now, but we do know this: Thursday night, authorities shot and then apprehended the lone suspect, Major Nidal Malik Hasan. A psychiatrist who was set to deploy to Iraq at the end of the month, Hasan reportedly opened fire around the "Readiness Center" at Fort Hood, where troops are prepared for deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. And though this scene is a most extreme and tragic outlier, it comes at a time when the stress of combat has affected so many soldiers individually that it makes it increasingly difficult for the military as a whole to deploy for wars abroad.

Bast isn’t being very subtle. Our warmakers are causing our soldiers to kill themselves, and others:

Hasan's perspective is unknown. He had yet to fight abroad. But the accusations against him can't help but bring to mind the violence scarring military bases all over the country after the duration of two long, brutal wars.

It’s also not too early in the story for Andrew Bast to mock conservatives as "morally bankrupt" for their speculation:

And yet, some are already suggesting that Maj. Hasan's lack of combat experience precludes us from assuming the crimes were at all influenced by the stress of war. "They weren't in Iraq," author Dinesh D'Souza said on television Thursday night, analyzing the culprit. "They were living a normal, everyday life." But he is wrong. In the midst of two wars, those living as military and military family experience a different, often more distressing, everyday experience of 'normal.' And forgetting that, either in understanding this singular case, or making a decision about more deployments, is dangerous at best, and morally bankrupt at worst.

To Bast, conservatives are merciless in "pushing a thumb down on an already stressed-out military" and guaranteeing a repeat of the "homegrown terror on display" in Texas:

The U.S. is drawing down troops in Iraq at a quick clip, but General Stanley McChrystal has requested tens of thousands more to fight in Afghanistan. Though President Obama has made no decision about the way forward, some suggest that as many 80,000 more could be sent in as reinforcements. That would put nearly 150,000 American soldiers in country for at least the foreseeable future, pushing a thumb down on an already stressed-out military. Of course, the vast majority of those under that stress, no matter how brutal, will not pick up a gun and shoot indiscriminately, like Hasan did. But the situation is bad, and getting much worse. From there, it isn't much of a leap to argue that the to further tax our military would do as much as anything to guarantee that the homegrown terror on display today could well repeat itself in the future.

This is just another case of an anti-war blogger pretending they're for "the troops" because they want them removed from war zones.

Maddow Wrongly Claims 'Constitution Doesn't Have A Preamble'

Noel Sheppard — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 10:23:38 -0500

Did you know the United States Constitution doesn't have a Preamble?

Well, that's what the oh so arrogant, high and mighty MSNBC host Rachel Maddow told her audience Thursday night.

In a segment attacking the attendees of yesterday's "House Call" protests on Capitol Hill, Maddow chided Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) for claiming he was quoting from the Preamble of the Constitution (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript, relevant section at 2:05, file photo):

RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Congressman Akin was not alone in stumbling over a little basic U.S. history. He had some good company in the top Republican in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner.
(VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN BOEHNER (R-OHIO.): This is my copy of the Constitution. And I'm gonna stand here with our Founding Fathers who wrote in the Preamble, "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
(END VIDEOTAPE):
MADDOW (waving hands): Nnn, Constitution doesn't have a Preamble. Not. Nope. Stop it. That would be the Declaration of Independence. Ooh.

Actually, Rach, the Constitution DOES have a Preamble, and I doth quote:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

As you liberals so love Wikipedia, in its section titled "Preamble to the United States Constitution":

The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the fundamental purposes and guiding principles that the Constitution is meant to serve. In general terms it states, and courts have referred to it as reliable evidence of, the Founding Fathers' intentions regarding the Constitution's meaning and what they hoped it would achieve (especially as compared with the Articles of Confederation).

Nice call, Rach!

Of course, if she or her crack fact-checking team at MSNBC had done their homework, they would have found "We hold these truths to be self-evident" does indeed come from the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence and not the Preamble to the Constitution as Boehner said.

Alas, when one fact checks, especially as arrogantly as Maddow does, you should be completely accurate or you end up looking like a bigger jackass than the person you're mocking.

That oughta wipe the smug, condescending smirk off her face!

Open Thread

NB Staff — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 10:07:51 -0500

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: how will apologists try to spin this one?

Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "Allahu Akbar!" — an Arabic phrase for "God is great!" — before opening fire, the base commander said Friday.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and their families. This is just more evidence that Hasan had assumed the role of Jihadist in the massacre.

Unemployment Rate Jumps to 10.2%; AP Reports 'Economy Is Rebounding'

P.J. Gladnick — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:43:02 -0500

The October unemployment rate has just been released and it has jumped to double digits at 10.2%, the worst rate since 1983. Just a little over half a point higher would make this the worst recession since the Great Depression. So how is the Associated Press reporting the growing unemployment numbers? "The economy is rebounding." I kid you not.

This AP report by Christopher S. Rugaber was published earlier this morning before the official unemployment rate was released. Notice how AP tries to cushion the blow by speculating that it would probably just rise to 9.9% for October:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The economy is rebounding from its deepest slump since the 1930s, but it probably won't seem that way when the government releases its monthly employment report on Friday.

Employers aren't expected to start adding jobs for several more months. Many are skeptical about the strength and sustainability of the recovery,

The nation's economy probably lost a net total of 175,000 jobs in October, pushing the unemployment rate to 9.9 percent, according to a survey of Wall Street economists by Thomson Reuters. The Labor Department report is scheduled for release at 8:30 a.m. EST.

Most economists think the rate will eventually surpass 10 percent, a level last seen in June 1983.

The AP couldn't wait a few hours before filing this embarrassing egg-on-the face unemployment report? Were they that anxious to promote fictitious happy news on the economic front? Most economists think the rate will "eventually" surpass 10 percent? "Eventually" lasted only a few hours after the report was filed with the immediate jump to 10.2 percent, not sometime in the vague future.

AP continues to laughably divorce itself from reality in the rest of the report:

On Wall Street, a better-than-expected jobless claims report and an upbeat forecast from Cisco Systems Inc. buoyed investors Thursday. The Dow Jones industrial average added nearly 204 points to 10,005.96, and broader indexes also gained.

...Many companies also are squeezing more production from their existing work forces. Productivity, the amount of output per hour worked, jumped 9.5 percent in the third quarter, the Labor Department said Thursday.

That's the sharpest increase in six years and followed a 6.6 percent rise in the second quarter. The increases enable companies to produce more without hiring extra workers.

Still, many economists saw a bright side: companies can only drive their existing workers so far. Eventually, they will have to hire more people as the economy improves.

...The central bank said economic activity has "continued to pick up," but Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues warned that rising joblessness and tight credit could restrain the rebound in the months ahead.

There actually is one green shoot in the economy. The employment prospects at the Associated Press for Baghdad Bob have gotten much brighter.

Update: The original "happy face" AP unemployment rate report link at Yahoo! Finance has been replaced with this report reflecting the latest stats. You can run, AP, but you can't hide. Your original embarrassing report still exists on the Web.

'Noisy Rally' By 'a Few Thousand' Matched by 'Powerful' AARP and AMA Endorsements

Brent Baker — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:41:09 -0500

Despite the mass shooting at Fort Hood, the ABC, CBS and NBC newscasts Thursday night squeezed in full stories pegged to a “kill the bill” anti-Pelosi/ObamaCare rally outside the U.S. Capitol attended by “angry protesters” as all the stories also stressed how President Obama got a “boost” from “big,” “powerful” “key” and “major” endorsements from the AARP and AMA.

NBC's Brian Williams contrasted “big endorsements by two influential groups” with “a big, noisy rally urging lawmakers to just say no,” while reporter Kelly O'Donnell minimized the conservative event as “a few thousand protesters.” ABC's Jonathan Karl, however, recognized how “the hastily-planned protest drew one of the largest crowds in memory for a congressional event. The crowd extends all the way up around to the House side of the building, across to the Senate side, literally surrounding the western front of the Capitol.”

NBC's Kelly recounted how the House bill would “expand health coverage to 96 percent of Americans, and create government-backed insurance called a public option. Today that plan won a powerful endorsement. AARP, the lobby group for Americans over 50, signed on and showed off boxes of supportive petitions” and that was “followed by another boost, the doctors' lobby, the American Medical Association.”

ABC anchor Charles Gibson set up the World News story:

It has been a wild day in the battle over health care reform. In Washington, opponents of President Obama's reform plan held a raucous demonstration and then descended on Congress just as the President was making a surprise appearance to trumpet two major endorsements of his proposal.

Jonathan Karl:

The town hall fury of August has come to Capitol Hill....

The hastily-planned protest drew one of the largest crowds in memory for a congressional event. The crowd extends all the way up around to the House side of the building, across to the Senate side, literally surrounding the western front of the Capitol. While Republicans protested, President Obama touted two big endorsements of the health care bill, from the AARP and the American Medical Association....

Katie Couric introduced the CBS Evening News piece:

The fight over health care reform is turning into a fierce battle in Washington. Opponents of the House bill showed strength in numbers today, while supporters fired back touting two key endorsements.

Chip Reid:

Outside the Capitol today, thousands of angry protesters called on Congress to kill the House health care reform bill. Inside a House office building, anti-abortion protesters destroyed copies of the bill, which they say would allow for taxpayer-funded abortions, a contention Democratic leaders deny....

The White House is worried enough about the vote that the President made an unannounced appearance today to tout endorsements of the bill by the seniors' lobby AARP and by the AMA, the nation's largest organization of doctors...

The entire story on the Thursday, November 5 NBC Nightly News, transcript provided by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: A crucial vote on health care reform is drawing closer tonight. Today you could see and feel the stakes being raised with some big endorsements by two influential groups, and on the other side, a big, noisy rally urging lawmakers to just say no. NBC's Kelly O'Donnell saw all of it today. She's with us tonight from Capitol Hill. Kelly, good evening.

KELLY O’DONNELL: Good evening, Brian. And it's because the House is prepared for an unusual weekend vote that this turned out to be a pivotal day for both sides in the health care debate. Democrats got big-name support, and conservative opponents were able to turn out a boisterous crowd here at the Capitol. Anger and action from a few thousand protesters today.

REP. TOM PRICE (R-GA): We are here today for a House call on Washington!

O’DONNELL: Furious with Democrats and President Obama over health care reform.

REP. PETER HOEKSTRA (R-MI): Madam Speaker, throw out this bill!

O’DONNELL: Encouraged by conservative organizers to take their outrage inside congressional office buildings. At least a dozen arrests were made. This was the scene outside Speaker Pelosi's office. The House bill would cost $1.2 trillion over 10 years, expand health coverage to 96 percent of Americans, and create government-backed insurance called a public option. Today that plan won a powerful endorsement. AARP, the lobby group for Americans over 50, signed on and showed off boxes of supportive petitions.

BARRY RAND, AARP: This bill includes critical priorities for seniors.

O’DONNELL: Followed by another boost, the doctors' lobby, the American Medical Association said, although it “is not the perfect bill,” “it would make the system better.” Armed with those long sought after endorsements, the President made a surprise visit to the White House briefing room.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I urge Congress to listen to AARP, listen to the AMA, and pass this reform for hundreds of millions of Americans who will benefit from it.

O’DONNELL: And the President just won't urge Congress, he's actually going to make an unusual visit here tomorrow if his schedule holds to see House Democrats and to meet with them, especially the three dozen or so moderate Democrats who have concerns about costs and specifics related to abortion funding and illegal immigrants that are in the House bill.

WaPo's Milbank Decries 'Hateful and Gruesome' Hill Protest, Thrown by 'Party of No Taste'

Tim Graham — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 08:36:04 -0500

At the Capitol Hill rally against nationalized health care on Thursday, talk-radio host and author Mark Levin talked to the press: "These are citizen patriots out here, and I’m tired of them being smeared." Some didn’t get the message. In Friday’s Washington Post, columnist Dana Milbank played the usual game of quoting the wackiest signs and smearing thousands of people with them.

His column’s title was "No one said freedom was pretty." On the homepage of the Post website, it said: "Milbank: Michele Bachmann's anti-health reform event brings out the party of no taste." Here’s a sample of Milbank’s account:

In the front of the protest, a sign showed President Obama in white coat, his face painted to look like the Joker. The sign, visible to the lawmakers as they looked into the cameras, carried a plea to "Stop Obamunism." A few steps farther was the guy holding a sign announcing "Obama takes his orders from the Rothchilds" [sic], accusing Obama of being part of a Jewish plot to introduce the antichrist.

But the best of Bachmann's recruits were a few rows into the crowd, holding aloft a pair of 5-by-8-foot banners proclaiming "National Socialist Healthcare, Dachau, Germany, 1945." Both banners showed close-up photographs of Holocaust victims, many of them children....

"Who knew a casual comment on TV could generate this?" Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Tex.) exulted as he stood in front of the Dachau banner.

Now, objecting to the health-care bill is one thing. But doesn't it send the wrong message for House Republicans to hold an event on the Capitol grounds full of hateful and gruesome words and images?

Milbank singled out anti-abortion protests with their bloody-fetus references. Question to Milbank: if abortion images are gruesome, aren’t pro-abortion policies the accomplishment of those gruesome images?

A week ago, Democrats had a tiny health-care rally on the Hill. Milbank also chronicled that one wearing his typical jester’s hat. But once again, he was upset at the tastelessness of anti-abortion protesters:

But for all the precautions, policy pep rallies have a way of taking unwanted turns, and Thursday's did so almost immediately after Pelosi stepped to the microphone. "Nancy Pelosi, you'll burn in hell for this," said a voice, amplified by a bullhorn, from about 50 yards away.

"Thank you, insurance companies of America," Pelosi replied to the man. Actually, they were abortion protesters, and they were loud.

"In this legislation, we will immediately begin to close the doughnut hole," the speaker proclaimed.

"We won't pay for murder!" a heckler heckled.

"Prevention and wellness are an important part of this legislation," the speaker declared.

"We won't pay for murder!" the heckler repeated. Finally, police were able to silence the activists, who held a gruesome poster showing an aborted fetus and signs demanding "Kill the bill."

Milbank pointed out that this rally had almost no attendance, aside from a smattering of Hill staffers. But at this one, Milbank’s incessant snarkiness broke, and he was moved:

Still, there were moving moments, as when Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (Ohio) spoke of her battle with multiple sclerosis. And Rep. John Dingell (Mich.), who succeeded his father in Congress in 1955, recalled the birth of Medicare in 1965.

"I did have the privilege of sitting in the chair when we passed Medicare," he said, and "I used this here gavel to preside over the House." The audience gave a hearty cheer this time when he held up the instrument. "And I'm going to lend it to whoever it is who gets to preside over this legislation, because a good piece of wood doesn't wear out with one great event."

It was a powerful image.

The only thing that ruined the liberal-Democrat nostalgia for him was U2 background music.