Archive for the ‘Media’ Category
John Jasinski’s op-ed in the Owatonna newspaper is hard-hitting and to the point. The point that caught my eye the most was when Sen. Jasinski said “But the biggest problem is the precedent it sets: if the governor’s decision is allowed to stand, then every future governor will effectively be able to hold the Legislature or Supreme Court hostage until they get everything they want. Imagine a governor withholding funding to the courts over a ruling they didn’t like. Gov. Dayton’s veto has opened that door.”
Think of the power that precedent would give a (God forbid) Gov. Thissen or Gov. Erin Murphy. Minnesota would turn into an autocratic state almost immediately. Let’s remember that Rep. Thissen already verbally abused paid staffers. Imagine what he’d do if the courts ruled in Gov. Dayton’s favor and Thissen became governor. It’s a frightening thought.
Another of Sen. Jasinski’s points came when he said “We also won’t be able to have session, so every urgent project will face another year without funding. Want Highway 14 to get done? Thanks to the governor’s action, we won’t be able to provide any more money for it until 2019. That goes for any other road, bridge, or infrastructure project, or any law that needs to be fixed.”
Gov. Dayton’s latest temper tantrum essentially stops the state for 2 years, though you wouldn’t know it if you got your information from the Twin Cities media’s reporting:
Gov. Dayton agreed to this budget, including the tax relief. He intended to veto this tax package just like he vetoed the tax relief package he agreed to last year. Gov. Dayton even accused Republicans of “political blackmail.” If anyone’s playing political blackmail, it’s Gov. Dayton. He agreed to the budget. Now, he’s trying to get Republicans to renegotiate major parts of the tax relief package.
Thank God Gov. Dayton won’t preside over another budget session. Every group of taxpayers is paying more taxes. Minnesotans aren’t getting more services for those additional taxes, either. It’s time he retired and spent more time with his family.
Technorati: Mark Dayton, Paul Thissen, Erin Murphy, DFL, Separation of Powers, John Jasinski, Legislative Branch, John Guthmann, Judicial Branch, Lawsuit
While reading this article that announced that Hugh Hewitt was getting his own show on MSNBC, I read something that almost made me start laughing uncontrollably.
The article said “NBC News chairman Andy Lack is known to favor hard news, and has programmed the network to feature a broader range of editorial opinions in addition to traditional newsmen like Brian Williams.” Since when is Lying Brian Williams a “traditional” newsman? Have industry standards dropped that low?
For instance, this article highlights “Choppergate.” That’s where it said “During the January 30, 2015, NBC Nightly News broadcast, Brian Williams referred to “a terrible moment a dozen years back during the invasion of Iraq when the helicopter we were traveling in was forced down after being hit by an RPG.” Williams later said he was not in the helicopter that was hit by an RPG, but in a helicopter directly behind it. The pilots of Williams’ helicopter say their chopper was not directly behind the hit Chinook, but in a different company altogether.”
Based on the things other anchors have said, perhaps Williams is a traditional news anchor. Compared with Scott Pelley’s recent accusations against Steve Scalise, Williams’ statements don’t seem that terrible. Williams’ statements are just verifiably dishonest. Pelley’s questions are downright offensive. Here’s a reminder of Pelley’s disgusting outburst:
It’s time to ask whether journalists have any integrity left. I’m not betting they do.
Technorati: Hugh Hewitt, MSNBC, Scott Pelley, Brian Williams, News Anchors
This morning on Outnumbered, Sandra Smith asked #OneLuckyGuy Rep. Jason Chaffetz if failure to pass health care reform was an option politically. With all due respect to Ms. Smith, that’s the wrong question. With people getting hit with unaffordable health insurance premiums and skyrocketing deductibles, the question that should be asked of Democrats is whether people can afford the Not That Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. The lead-in to the segment on health care was video of Sen. Ed Markey playing the scare tactic card, saying that Republicans wanted to throw Grandma and Grandpa out of the nursing home (with Alzheimer’s) to give tax cuts to the rich.
First, the media should stop obsessing over the non-issue of Russia working with President Trump to win the election. It’s time for the MSM to start asking important questions about issues that people care about. That means starting with asking Democrats why they haven’t offered anything substantive to fix Obamacare. Thus far, all they’ve done is employed scare tactics to win points politically for 2018.
The truth is that Obamacare is collapsing. Insurance companies are leaving exchanges on a weekly basis. This week’s exit is Anthem leaving “the Obamacare exchange in Ohio next year.” The result of that is the “move would leave participants in 20 counties without any insurer.”
Here’s the video of Sen. Markey’s blather:
Next, it’s time for the media to start doing its job by asking tough questions of Democrats about the ACA. Third, it’s time that the MSM to stop pretending that the ACA just needs a few tweaks to fix things. It’s a disaster waiting to happen. It’s time Democrats started coming up with substantive improvements ASAP.
Fourth, it’s time for Republicans to bury their differences and to settle on a sensible plan that fixes what’s wrong with the ACA. It’s beyond time to fix what’s broken. It’s time to eliminate differences, set aside egos and fix this disaster for the good of the nation. That’s the only thing that matters at this point.
Technorati: Obamacare, Mainstream Media, Jason Chaffetz, Ed Markey
This Reuters article is breathtakingly misguided. First, the article is a hatchet job about Betsy DeVos’s confirmation hearing. What’s important to know is that Reuters says “Next Tuesday, the Education Committee will likely approve sending her name to the full chamber when it votes in an executive session. Then, Democrats could block the nomination with a filibuster on the Senate floor.”
Has Reuters been hiding in Saddam Hussein’s rabbit hole hideout the last 4 years? Have they paid attention to the Democrats’ whining the last month? NEWS BULLETIN TO REUTERS: Harry Reid killed the filibuster of presidential cabinet nominees in 2013.
What’s noteworthy about the hearing itself is how bitchy Democrats are. For instance, the Reuters article says “Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, an advocate of tough financial regulation, asked whether DeVos or her children had attended public schools, borrowed student loans or received federal financial help known as Pell grants. ‘You have no experience with financial aid,’ Warren summed up when DeVos answered ‘no.'”
She’s a billionaire who’s contributed millions of dollars to school choice scholarship funds. Why would she then require her children to rack up a pile of student loan debt?
Many were dismayed DeVos would not pledge to carry out rules on sexual assault, for-profit colleges and fair access for students with disabilities, only saying she would review the policies.
TRANSLATION: Democrats are upset that Trump’s pick isn’t a doctrinaire liberal who supports teachers unions. My advice for them is simple: put on your big boy britches. Get over it. You lost. The new president will be taking the nation in a different, more prosperous, direction.
NOTICE TO ELIZABETH WARREN: Keep doing what you’re doing, which is acting like a bitch. You’ve been letting your hostility flood the hearings. It isn’t attractive.
Finally, it’s difficult to trust Reuters as a news organization when they don’t know basic Senate rules. It’s impossible to think of Sen. Warren as a presidential candidate. She’s a bigger bitch than Hillary, which is saying a lot, and she hates anyone who’s been successful.
One of the major highlights of CNN’s townhall meeting with Speaker Ryan at George Washington University came during the question of the night. That’s when Speaker Ryan announced that the House would repeal the ACA and pass the Republican replacement “at the same time, and in some cases in the same bill.” Speaker Ryan continued, saying “So we want to advance repealing this law with its replacement at the same time.”
The first person to ask a question of Speaker Ryan was a small business owner named Jeff Jeans, who identified himself as a former Republican and a cancer survivor. Jeans told Speaker Ryan “Just like you, I was opposed to the Affordable Care Act. When it was passed, I told my wife we would close our business before I’d comply with this law. Then, at 49, I was given 6 weeks to live and with a very curable type of cancer. We offered 3 times the cost of my treatments, which was rejected. They required an insurance card. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, I’m standing here alive. Being both a small business person and a person with pre-existing conditions, I rely on the Affordable Care Act to purchase my own insurance. Why would you repeal the Affordable Care Act without a replacement?”
Ryan replied “We wouldn’t do that. We want to replace it with something better. … We believe that state high risk pools are a smarter way of guaranteeing coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. We had a really good one in Wisconsin. Utah had a really great one. I was talking with a congresswoman from Washington today who was telling me how good their high risk pool is. What I mean when I say this is that about 8% of all the people less than 65 years of age have that type of pre-existing condition. … We don’t want people to go poor or go bankrupt because this thing happens to them so we obviously want a system where they can get affordable coverage without going bankrupt when they get sick. But we can do that without destroying the rest of the health care system for everybody else. That’s the point I’m trying to make. What we should have done is fix what was broken in health care without breaking what was working with health care and that’s what Obamacare unfortunately did.”
Here’s the video of that exchange:
It’s worth noting that Minnesota had a high risk pool, too, which was also working well until the ACA destroyed it. In 2007, before then-Sen. Obama was elected president, Minnesota boasted that 92.8% of its citizens were insured. Of those that didn’t have health insurance, more than half were eligible for some sort of taxpayer-subsidized health insurance. Had those people gotten signed up, Minnesota’s insured rate would’ve exceeded 97%, which would’ve been better than anything that the ACA could ever hope to accomplish.
What’s particularly insulting and infuriating is the fact that Democrats know the Republicans’ plans. It’s infuriating because Ryan’s plan has been out there for months. If there’s anything certain about Speaker Ryan, it’s that he’s a policy junkie in the best sense of the word. He lives to write great legislation.
Speaker Ryan said that he didn’t have a specific date that he’d put on repealing and replacing the ACA, though he told Jake Tapper that he thinks it will happen in President Trump’s first 100 days.
If that happens, you’ll see the economy take off because Obamacare is sucking the incentive out of growing small businesses. Watch the entire video. It’s educational and enlightening.
Technorati: Paul Ryan, Town Hall Meeting, George Washington University, Affordable Care Act, High Risk Pools, Jeff Jeans, Small Businesses, Republicans, Jake Tapper, CNN
To: Speaker Daudt, Senate Majority Leader Gazelka
From: Gary Gross, uppity peasant
Subject: Health insurance premium relief
Speaker Daudt and Senate Majority Leader Gazelka, I’m sure you’re well aware of Gov. Dayton’s insistence that you pass his health insurance premium relief plan, aka passing his wimpy political relief proposal. According to this article, he wants you to pass his wimpy proposal virtually immediately.
As a loyal conservative activist, it pains me to say this. I’m asking you to follow his direction (with an asterisk.) I know that the GOP plan includes premium relief. I know that the GOP legislation isn’t the same as Gov. Dayton’s wimpy proposal. (Thank God for major miracles, right?)
Please pass the GOP legislation ASAP, then send it to his desk. When it’s passed, I’d recommend that you hold a major press conference right at 6:00 pm CT that night so that each of the Twin Cities TV stations is forced to cover the press conference/celebration announcement. Also, circulate this comparison table to the media:
Highlight to Minnesotans that the GOP legislation that you’ve passed in the opening days of the regular session includes extensive premium relief that Gov. Dayton insists get passed. Then highlight for Minnesotans that it also includes plans to improve access to care, competition & choice and make provider networks more family friendly.
Dare Gov. Dayton to veto your legislation. Dare him to explain why he didn’t work with you on these issues that would improve Minnesotans’ lives. Dare him to explain why he vetoed a bill that’s attracted significant bipartisan support.
Highlight to Minnesotans that you’re fighting for them. Highlight to Minnesotans that Gov. Dayton’s fighting for … well, who knows what he’s fighting for these days.
Technorati: Mark Dayton, MNsure, Health Insurance Premium Relief, DFL, Kurt Daudt, Paul Gazelka, Health Insurance Networks, Access to Care, Choice and Competition, Press Conference, MNGOP
This morning, Chris Wallace interviewed Jill Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate. Saying that Ms. Stein is eccentric is being kind. I’d rather characterize her as a nutjob. During the interview, she insisted repeatedly that there were 75,000 ballots in Detroit alone where voters filled out all of the races except the presidential races.
That’s a wild, unsubstantiated accusation. According to the Michigan Secretary of State’s website, Detroit voters cast 247,369 votes in the presidential election and 243,019 votes in Detroit’s congressional elections. That’s a difference of 4,350 votes, which is a far cry from 75,000 ballots that weren’t fully filled out.
After hearing an unsubstantiated accusation like that, it isn’t surprising that people think she isn’t credible. And yes, she said 75,000 ballots in Detroit. I DVRed FNS so I rewound the video to make sure that I hadn’t misunderstood what Ms. Stein said.
It’s worth noting that Ms. Stein said “Well, I can tell you, for example, that in Toledo in 2004, there were 90,000 votes that were marked blank, which were discovered not to be blank.” Ms. Stein then said that those votes would’ve been enough to change the outcome of the election.
According to the Ohio Secretary of State’s statistics, just 220,000 votes were cast in Lucas County. (Toledo is the county seat of Lucas County.)
Here’s the video of Chris Wallace’s interview of Jill Stein:
Reasonable people can disagree on who should’ve won the election. There’s no disputing, though, the fact that Ms. Stein’s accusations aren’t substantiated. The simple truth is that she went on national TV and got her credibility demolished in less than 10 minutes.
Technorati: Jill Stein, Fever Swamp, Toledo, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, Spoiled Ballots, Presidential Recounts, National TV, Green Party, Fundraising, Election 2016
Much internet bandwidth has been used on who won Monday night’s presidential debate. Two of the best political thinkers think that Trump won. Pat Caddell, Jimmy Carter’s pollster, has some interesting statistics that indicate some interesting things that contradict conventional wisdom. In this article, Caddell notes that “48 percent said Clinton did a better job, compared to 43 percent, who said Trump did the better job” before noting “95 percent of the people we contacted told us they were not going to change their vote based on the debate.”
Caddell then noted that “Trump won on the most critical factor, on whether Clinton or Trump was more ‘plausible’ as president, 46 percent to her 42 percent,” saying that “that, for him, was what this debate was really about.” Dovetailing off of that is the fact that, according to Caddell, “forty-eight percent of respondents said in the debate Trump showed he would be a strong leader, compared with 44 percent for Clinton.”
That’s the statistical side of things. Newt Gingrich’s op-ed provides the analysis:
The Intellectual Yet Idiot class that dominates our news media fell all over themselves critiquing Trump and praising Holt and Clinton. In doing so, they repeated the mistake they have made about every debate since August 2015.
Trump wins strategically because in a blunt, clear style, he is saying things most Americans believe.
With 70% of the country thinking that we’re heading in the wrong direction, it’s a major victory for a candidate to win the people’s trust. That’s confirmed by Salena Zito’s reporting, which Gingrich cited here:
Salena Zito is one of the country’s most perceptive journalists, in part because she is grounded outside of Washington and New York. Her column about the debate, “How Trump Won Over a Bar of Undecideds and Democrats,” should be required reading for everyone who wants to understand why Trump strategically won the debate.
After that, Gingrich mocked the elitists:
Trump has a hard time with media elites because they earn a living by talking. The media values glibness. In their world you can speak nonsense if you do it smoothly and convincingly. Trump is a blunt, let’s-make-a-deal, let’s-get-the-building-built, let’s-sell-our-product businessman. The first debate showcased a blunt, plain spoken businessman and a polished professional politician.
In other words, the fight was word salad vs. leadership. Here’s how that worked out:
Time: Trump 55 Clinton 45
Fortune: Trump 53, Clinton 47
N.J.com (New Jersey): Trump 57.5, Clinton 37.78
CNBC: Trump 68, Clinton 32
WCPO Cincinnati: Trump 57, Clinton 37
Variety: Trump 58.12, Clinton 41.88
Slate: Trump 55.18, Clinton 44.82
WKRN Nashville: Trump 64.58, Clinton 35.42
Las Vegas Sun: Trump 82, Clinton 18
Fox5 San Diego: Trump 61.45, Clinton 33.69
San Diego Tribune: Trump 65, Clinton 35
Technorati: Polling, Pat Caddell, Presidential Debate, Hillary Clinton, Word Salad, Democrats, Media, Salena Zito, Battleground States, Pennsylvania, Undecided Voters, Donald Trump, Leadership, Republicans, Election 2016
Moments ago, Fox News announced that Roger Ailes resigned as Chairman and CEO of Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network. They also announced that “Rupert Murdoch will assume the role of Chairman and acting CEO of Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network.” Murdoch then issued a statement saying “Roger Ailes has made a remarkable contribution to our company and our country. Roger shared my vision of a great and independent television organization and executed it brilliantly over 20 great years. Fox News has given voice to those who were ignored by the traditional networks and has been one of the great commercial success stories of modern media. It is always difficult to create a channel or a publication from the ground up and against seemingly entrenched monopolies. To lead a flourishing news channel, and to build Fox Business, Roger has defied the odds.
His grasp of policy and his ability to make profoundly important issues accessible to a broader audience stand in stark contrast to the self-serving elitism that characterizes far too much of the media. I am personally committed to ensuring that Fox News remains a distinctive, powerful voice. Our nation needs a robust Fox News to resonate from every corner of the country. To ensure continuity of all that is best about Fox News and what it stands for, I will take over as Chairman and acting CEO, with the support of our existing management team under Bill Shine, Jay Wallace and Mark Kranz.”
Ailes built an amazing company in the 1990s. He grew FNC in the 2000s. He’d started building a credible news agency in the 2010s. Unfortunately, he allegedly mistreated women. I’m not going into that. That’s for a jury to potentially decide.
