Paul Burka: The Liberal Who Does Not Admire Liberals [Kevin D. Williamson]
I had some critical words for Texas Monthly's Paul Burka and his blindered take on the Texas governor's race. For those readers who may not be familiar with Texas Monthly, I helpfully communicated that Paul Burka is a garden-variety liberalish Democrat of the sort that springs naturally from the soil of Austin, which has been richly manured for a generation by the intellectual droppings of the the aging claque of has-been LBJ sycophants who still trade on their dusty and diminishing political cachet.
Burka has responded with a straight-outta-the-textbook bit of buffoonery implicitly denying that he is, in fact, a liberal, writing:
The author begins his piece with the observation that “Paul Burka is no admirer of conservatives….” He is quite right. Nor am I an admirer of liberals. I believe that strict adherence to ideology and litmus tests are impediments to the practice of politics. When I write about politics, I try to look at the merits of an issue, not whether it fits somebody’s preconception of whether it is conservative or liberal.
This is nonsense of the sort that should be put in the Smithsonian Museum of Nonsense. "I try to look at the merits of an issue," Burka writes. Well, gee golly, Paul, it's not as though it's never occurred to anybody else to do that. Might it be possible that the differences in how we judge the merits of various issues are what make liberals liberals and conservatives conservatives?
Burka writes as though the ideology comes first, as though somebody flips a coin, chooses a side, and then starts judging the issues according to a self of beliefs unrelated to one's judgment of the merits of the issues. That is kind of dumb, and I suspect that Burka knows as much. But to admit as much would rob him of the pleasures of playing the solomonic judge, the impartial observer and critic who just happens to find, based on his disinterested and objective insight, that the merits largely are on the liberal side. There's a word for that: liberal. (Actually, there's two words for that: tedious liberal.)
The rest of his response is full of interesting assertions — that CHIP is not an entitlement program, for instance — and what seem to be intentional misreadings of what I wrote, written in the sort of flat-vanilla-soda prose that the "I'm Not a Liberal, I'm Just Wise" approach seems to inspire. Ugh.
Rumors Christiane Amanpour Will Host This Week Appear to be True [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
This e-mail just went out to CNN staff:
I have some news for you about Christiane Amanpour. ABC News will announce today that she is joining that organization to headline one of its programs. You may have seen media speculation concerning this move; out of respect for Christiane, we have reserved comment until now, when we all agree that the time is right to share her plans.
Over the years, Christiane and I have talked about her professional goals and personal interests, and more recently about the excitement of a new opportunity at this point in her career. While I don't presume to speak for her, as her colleague and friend for more than 25 years I know that this decision has not been an easy one. Since 1990 when Christiane became a CNN international correspondent, she has covered the defining news events of our time. Her work burnished our news brand and gave it authority. In turn, the CNN imprimatur opened doors for her around the world and provided a global platform for the intelligent, courageous, principled reporting that is her signature. CNN and Christiane helped make each other great.
She will depart her CNN International show at the end of April. We'll announce changes to the CNNI programming schedule in the coming weeks; today is about honoring our friend. For her hard work these many years on behalf of CNN; for going where the story was, wherever in the world that might be; for her passion, character and generosity; and most of all, for her extraordinary journalism, Christiane has our gratitude, respect and sincere best wishes.
"I think the first tournament Tiger Woods plays again, wherever it is, will be the biggest media event other than the Obama inauguration in the past 10 or 15 years," McManus told an SI.com reporter after the NCAA basketball tournament draw Sunday.
"It is hard to overestimate how much interest there will be," McManus said. "Tiger Woods is the most famous, most recognized, most accomplished athlete in the world, and his celebrity and prominence is even larger than it was. When you look at the fact that he gave a very simple press statement with no questions and every broadcast and cable news network in America carried it with great interest, I think that is an indication that whatever he does has enormous interest. And whatever he does on the golf course for the first time since Thanksgiving will be of interest to almost every man and women in this country."
A Couple of Thoughts about that Obama Interview [Kevin D. Williamson]
1. Obama goes out of his way to distinguish between the Israeli people and the Israeli government — "a special bond with the Israeli people" and all that. Translation: "Drop dead, Bibi." That is something we normally do with hostile regimes; i.e., "We have no ill will toward the long-suffering people of North Korea ...." Also, Obama pointed out that his administration condemned, "in the same terms," the Palestinian rioters' attack on a synagogue after having condemned the approval of an apartment building in Jerusalem. A violent assault and a zoning ruling, the same terms. One of these things is not like the other, no?
2. Would like to smack Bret Baier for asking the president of the United States his opinion on a golfer's sex life. I'm no fan of the presidency's neo-imperial trappings, but that's infra dig.
Obama's Astrofurf Operaton in Full Swing [Greg Pollowitz]
Big Journalism:
Organizing for America (formerly Organizing for Obama) has a Health Reform Action page which encourages members to write a letter to the editor. After typing in your zip code you get a list of local news outlets with radio buttons you can click: [. . .]
The next page gives you a large comment box to compose your letter and in the sidebar are a list of suggested talking points: [. . .]
Despite the warning on the OFA site, letters containing these exact talking points are now appearing in newspapers across the country. The line about the new study appears in letters sent to the following papers:
Obama’s Comparison of Hurricane Katrina and an Earthquake in Hawaii [Greg Pollowitz]
Drudge has been highlighting this excerpt from President Obama's Bret Baier interview where the president says Landrieu's "Louisiana Purchase" is actually a good idea to include in his Obamacare bill. Drudge calls the video "puzzling." Here's the exchange from the transcript:
BAIER: Do you know which specific deals are in or out, as of today?
OBAMA: I am certain that we've made sure, for example, that any burdens on states are alleviated, when it comes to what they're going to have to chip in to make sure that we're giving subsidies to small businesses, and subsidies to individuals, for example.
BAIER: So the Connecticut deal is still in?
OBAMA: So that's not — that's not going to be something that is going to be in this final package. I think the same is true on all of these provisions. I'll give you some exceptions though.
Something that was called a special deal was for Louisiana. It was said that there were billions — millions of dollars going to Louisiana, this was a special deal. Well, in fact, that provision, which I think should remain in, said that if a state has been affected by a natural catastrophe, that has created a special health care emergency in that state, they should get help. Louisiana, obviously, went through Katrina, and they're still trying to deal with the enormous challenges that were faced because of that.
(CROSS TALK)
OBAMA: That also — I'm giving you an example of one that I consider important. It also affects Hawaii, which went through an earthquake. So that's not just a Louisiana provision. That is a provision that affects every state that is going through a natural catastrophe.
Now I have said that there are certain provisions, like this Nebraska one, that don't make sense. And they needed to be out. And we have removed those. So, at the end of the day, what people are going to be able to say is that this legislation is going to be providing help to small businesses and individuals, across the board, in an even handed way, and providing people relief from a status quo that's just not working.
The only incident that I can think of that the president is referring to is this 2006 earthquake. Regardless of if you agree with the logic behind Landrieu's addition to the bill, how in the world is what happened to New Orleans equivalent to this relatively minor event in Hawaii?
Sources present at the time tell us that Ailes said he was “very proud of this bureau” and “they used to come to us after the news event…now they come to us for the news event as well…I really just want to congratulate you and thank you for that.” He also noted the news department continues to expand.
But after giving his congratulations, he addressed the Glenn Beck story, talking to a bureau in the same city as the anonymously-sourced newspaper article. “For the first time in our 14 years we’ve had people apparently shooting in the tent from within the tent,” said Ailes to the newsroom. “”We prefer people in the tent not dumping on other people in the tent.”
Ailes touched on freedom of speech while he noted Beck’s show is “his opinion, it’s not the opinion of Fox News” and said: “News is very expensive to do…it’s a business, I have to run a business; as well as a news-disseminating business.”
And while he didn’t single anyone out in particular, he seemed to imply the anti-Beck sentiment in the Kurtz column may have come from D.C. “You have outs,” he told the newsroom. “There are no locks on the outside of our doors.”
Re: Because Big Executive Bonuses Are Evil [Greg Pollowitz]
Shouldn't the Times make sure none of that bonus money paid to its CEO comes from advertising revenues from taxpayer funded companies? Think of all the taxpayer money that went for bank and card ads that is now going for said bonus. In effect, it's a taxpayer funded bonus as well.
Will Anyone Ever Fact-Check President Obama? [Greg Pollowitz]
Here's an excerpt from an email I just received from President Obama on passing his health-care bill:
During moments like this, I believe it's important to remember why we have worked so hard for so long. That's why I spoke to the country Monday at a gathering in Ohio and said it plainly: I'm here for Natoma.
Natoma Canfield is like most of us: She works hard, and tries to do what's right. Years ago, she had battled back from cancer, so she always maintained health insurance in case she ever really needed it again. But because of her medical history, the insurance company kept raising her deductible and her premiums.
Last year alone, Natoma paid over $10,000 in monthly premiums and co-pays, while her insurance company chipped in just $900. And then they hiked up her rates another 40%. She simply couldn't afford it — she had to cancel her policy. That's when she wrote to me. I read her letter, and shared her story with insurance company CEOs as another reason why the system has to change.
That was two weeks ago. Then, just last week, the unthinkable happened: Natoma collapsed, and was rushed to a hospital. It's leukemia — the cancer has returned. Now she's in the hospital, worried sick not just about her condition, but how she'll financially survive.
How she'll financially survive? The Cleveland Clinic already told us how: She qualifies for aid, and the hospital has no intention of going after her house. Comment over at The Feed on the Cleveland Clinic story.
Robinson's base salary fell 4 percent to $962,500. But she got a bonus of about $2.3 million, four times the size of her 2008 bonus.
Robinson also received stock options that were worth $1.6 million when they were granted. About $560,000 of that was meant to replace options that had been given in 2008 and were later voided because they exceeded a limit set by company bylaws.
