Extreme partisanship and corporate money. Those are the two biggest problems four departing Representatives — 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats — have with today’s political climate. Zach Wamp (R-TN), Chet Edwards (D-Tx), Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) and Mike Castle (R-DE), sat down with ABC News last week to talk about their opinion of today’s Congress, politics, and the view from Washington, DC. It wasn’t pretty. Castle: Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del., who was taken out in his primary by Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell, expresed alarm at the division the movement had caused within his own party. “The Tea Party movement really is quite a bit different than the old Republican conservative movement, ” Castle said. ” They’re more than willing to take out Republicans, call us Republicans in name only, or whatever it may be. It was one thing when you were dealing with Democrats and Republicans. Now you’re dealing with divisions within your own party. ” Castle, a known centrist, also said that working with the other party — the Democrats — once seen as the cornerstone of a functioning democracy, has become a punishable offense. “I mean, I know I suffered in my primary defeat [because] I had supported some Democratic legislation, supported the president from time to time. And that was treated as a great sin,” Castle told ABC News. Both Democrats looked to the special interest money on Capitol Hill and in campaign finance as one of the reasons for Congress’ dysfunction: Shea-Porter said watching the growing influence of special interest money had been her biggest disappointment, calling it “awful for democracy.” ” I think it’s strangling us ,” she said. “They’re in the halls of Congress everywhere, and it means, for example, that you sit on a committee and you say something about concern about Chinese influence or something, you don’t even know if in the next election, somehow or another, they manage to send some money to some group that now doesn’t even have to say where they got it.” Edwards, too: ” In the future, you’re going to have to think before you cast a vote against an individual drug company. They can run a $2 million television campaign against you in central Texas or in Delaware, and take you out under the guise of being something they’re not,” Edwards said. “Congress has to find a solution to that within the limits of the new Supreme Court decision.” Not surprisingly, none of them had anything nice to say about the news media. Each member made a point to emphasize the bipartisan work they had taken part in during their time in Congress. However, each pointed out that the more cooperative interaction among members doesn’t hit the media radar as much as the conflicts. Shea-Porter said the media focused too much on the negativity in Congress. “I have listened to people on television say things like, ‘Well, everybody’s on the take in Washington,’ as if that’s a given fact. I think it just makes people more cynical about the whole process,” Shea-Porter said. Edwards blamed a misinformed public. “I think people are getting their news from stovepipe sources of information — where people are basically getting the news they want to hear. Whether it’s Fox on the right or MSNBC on the left, it’s making it hard for centrist Democrats. It’s making it hard to elect centrists, who I think are critical to the functioning of our checks and balances form of democracy.” Castle, who complained that conservative talking heads such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, misrepresented him during his primary campaign, echoed Edwards’ complaints, saying, “People are listening to what they want to listen to, and not hearing any other point of view at all. That, I think, is a huge problem affecting politics in America today. ”
Continue reading …Support NewsBusters with a tax-deductible year-end donation. We can provide NewsBusters as a free service only because of the thousands of concerned conservatives who support the Media Research Center financially each year and make possible the unique research operation behind the MRC's ongoing efforts to document, expose, and neutralize liberal media bias. We realize that over the last few months we’ve tried your patience with changes to NewsBusters which were not implemented as smoothly as we would have liked, but that doesn’t lessen our financial requirements. So, please consider a donation and demonstrate that NewsBusters readers are committed to NewsBusters, the MRC's mission and value the products we provide and the impact of the evidence we gather and disseminate. Click here to contribute via Visa, MasterCard or American Express. Please select “NewsBusters” from the drop down “program designation” menu so we can credit your contribution as coming from a NewsBusters reader. read more
Continue reading …enlarge I don’t know that it’s this cut and dried (after all, look how optimistic the neocons were about the results of invading Iraq), but yes, I’d say that on the whole, the conservatives I know seem to be real bedwetters: Political opinions are considered choices, and in Western democracies the right to choose one’s opinions — freedom of conscience — is considered sacrosanct. But recent studies suggest that our brains and genes may be a major determining factor in the views we hold. A study at University College London in the UK has found that conservatives’ brains have larger amygdalas than the brains of liberals. Amygdalas are responsible for fear and other “primitive” emotions. At the same time, conservatives’ brains were also found to have a smaller anterior cingulate — the part of the brain responsible for courage and optimism. If the study is confirmed, it could give us the first medical explanation for why conservatives tend to be more receptive to threats of terrorism, for example, than liberals. And it may help to explain why conservatives like to plan based on the worst-case scenario, while liberals tend towards rosier outlooks. “It is very significant because it does suggest there is something about political attitudes that are either encoded in our brain structure through our experience or that our brain structure in some way determines or results in our political attitudes,” Geraint Rees, the neurologist who carried out the study, told the media. Rees, who heads up UCL’s Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, was originally asked half-jokingly to study the differences between liberal and conservative brains for an episode of BBC 4′s Today show that was hosted by actor Colin Firth. But, after studying 90 UCL students and two British parliamentarians, the neurologist was shocked to discover a clear correlation between the size of certain brain parts and political views. He cautions that, because the study was carried out only on adults, there is no way to tell what came first — the brain differences or the political opinions. But evidence is beginning to accumulate that figuring out a person’s political proclivities may soon be as simple as a brain scan — or a DNA test.
Continue reading …In today's “Everything Is Caused By Climate Change” segment, the folks at Time magazine offer a howler destined to start your morning off right with a chuckle: ” Holiday Blizzard: More Signs of Global Warming .” The contents were even more hysterical: read more
Continue reading …Click here to view this media From our friends at Newshounds, the death panels and Betsy McCaughey are back fearmongering over end-of-life counseling. Sweet Jesus, these people make my head hurt. I thought we had seen the last of this shyster once the health care bill passed, but apparently I was wrong. Fox News Tries To Rehabilitate Palin’s Discredited “Death Panels” Smear : As The New York Times reported yesterday, the Obama administration has enacted Medicare regulations to include an end-of-life planning provision similar to one struck out of the health care reform bill after Sarah Palin “touched off a political storm over ‘death panels.’” Palin’s “death panels” accusation wasn’t just a lie , it was PolitiFact’s Lie of the Year for 2009. But good ol’ Fox News resuscitated the lie and gave it new life by just “asking” if the new regulations mark the return of death panels. Fortunately, Democratic Fox News contributor Kirsten Powers and liberal pundit Caroline Heldman forcefully rebutted the suggestion. The possible return of “death panels” was all over Fox News today with segments with such FoxNews.com titles as, ‘Death Panel’ Comeback? Return of Death Panels? and ‘ Death Panel’ Deception? The ‘Death Panel’ Comeback? segment, on The O’Reilly Factor, featured Media Matters 2009 Health Care Misinformer of the Year : Betsy McCaughey. But substitute host Eric Bolling distorted those details in his introduction to the O’Reilly Factor segment (the first video below). Bolling said, “Now the reports that President Obama is bringing back end of life planning with the Medicare regulation set to go into effect next week. The White House says, ‘No, that’s not true,’ issued a statement blaming a law signed by President Bush. So what’s really going on?” Bolling later said, “Whether or not this was brought up in the Bush Administration, who cares?” Bolling made no pretense of independence, supposedly a hallmark of The Factor. “I thought we were done with this (death panels)… but they’re back.” Bolling offered no challenge to McCaughey’s misinformation (government will be scripting end-of-life decisions, the Obama administration is enacting via regulation what it could not enact via legislation) but asked her to “take our viewer exactly what this regulation says… It incentives them to discuss end-of-life decisions.” To Heldman, he asked, “Do we really need to incentivize doctors to ask Grandma whether she wants to pull the plug year after year after year? Isn’t once enough?” Heldman, already a News Hounds Top Dog , was in especially good form in the segment. Yeah, heaven forbid the government might pay to help you take the burden off of your family about what to do with you if they don’t feel it’s worth keeping you alive and longer and you would have agreed if given the chance. The horror!
Continue reading …Catching up with a distorted news report from Christmas Day, the AP decided to distribute a particularly tendentious piece of “reporting” by the news service’s Washington, DC-based Alan Fram and Jennifer Agiesta , who misleadingly charged House Republicans “defied” public will on “tax cuts for the wealthy,” which were non-existent. They led: Republicans say they will follow “the people's priorities” when they gain power on Capitol Hill next month. Yet when it came to tax cuts for the wealthy and other top issues that dominated the just concluded lame-duck Congress, the GOP either defied what most Americans want or followed their will only after grudging, drawn-out battles. The duo’s first piece of evidence: Congress' approval of a compromise between President Barack Obama and congressional GOP leaders renewing expiring tax cuts for everyone, despite broad public opposition to including people earning over $250,000. An Associated Press-CNBC Poll in late November found only 34 percent wanted taxes reduced for the richest Americans. In fact, there was never any proposal on the table to “reduce” income taxes for any income class of Americans, just a continuation of the current rates. If the rates were not maintained, Americans would have faced a steep income tax hike as of January 1. (Yes, the wealthy, like everyone else with a job, will pay a little less in FICA, but that was not the subject of the AP-CNBC poll question .) read more
Continue reading …By Robert Scheer Two years into the Obama presidency and the economic data is still looking grim. Don’t be fooled by the gyrations of the stock market, where optimism is mostly a reflection of the ability of financial corporations—thanks to massive government largesse—to survive the mess they created. Related Entries December 27, 2010 Americans Admire Glenn Beck More Than the Dalai Lama December 15, 2010 Return of the Great Triangulator
Continue reading …By Ruth Marcus Mr. Speaker, please don’t. Go ahead, if you must, and cut taxes. Slash spending. Repeal health care. I understand. Elections have consequences. But BlackBerrys and iPads and laptops on the House floor? Reconsider, before it’s too late. Related Entries December 28, 2010 A Reality Check for the GOP December 27, 2010 The Game-Changer List
Continue reading …