Click here to view this media (h/t David at VideoCafe) Consistency and those niggling little details are the bugaboos to the conservative ideology. It’s easy to say that you want to privatize Social Security for future recipients, but that leaves the very real budget problem of knowing how to pay for current recipients, doesn’t it? Where does that money come from? And if you allow those 20 year olds to take those FICA taxes to some private, non-government backed entity, what exactly happens if at 70 years old, their 401ks (or whatever vehicle is chosen) are worthless because the financial institutions have failed, like they did just over two years ago? Do you tell those 70 year olds, “Gee, that’s a shame, but thems the breaks?” Likewise, when you’re dealing with Medicare, it’s very easy to say that it’s more efficient to offer vouchers to recipients…but then those niggling details crop up. For as much as Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels likens Medicare to a top down monstrosity, the reality is that Medicare is a non-profit enterprise. Unlike private insurance companies, whose sole purpose is to spend as little money on your medical costs as possible so as to offer a bigger profit to their executives and shareholders. So what happens when you need expensive care? For Daniels, maybe there needs to be a conversation about how your life just isn’t worth the cash required. But who is in charge of making that decision, Mitch? Daniels says that it should be up to the patient, but that isn’t the way it would work. How many health insurance companies let their customers decide the care they want? So we come back to the absolutely unacceptable notion of rationing health care, based on what? Your income/socio-economic level? Your age? Even the statistical analysis of outcomes or underwriting depersonalizes and dehumanizes people in need of treatment. How would you feel if these companies told you your life isn’t worth the expense? WALLACE: You talked about Medicare 2.0, private vouchers, not a government program? DANIELS: It will be a government program, but instead of a top- down monstrosity that we have today, once again I would divide the program and say to those who are in it or who are about to be in it, nothing will change for you. But I think for the young people coming up who are going to shoulder the bill, we ought to trust them to make more of their own decisions. You could, again, concentrate the resources on the poorest people, and also in this case the least healthy people, people who are better off — WALLACE: But you’d give them a private voucher so they could choose their own insurance plan? DANIELS: I would. WALLACE: You even say the government should put limits on end- of-life care. Are you talking about what Sarah Palin called the death panels? DANIELS: No, I didn’t say government should put limits on this, but what I’m worried about is the government making these decisions. I just stated what I think is a simple fact. I wish it wasn’t, but I think it is. We cannot afford in an aging society to pay for the most expensive technology every — for every single person regardless of income to the very, very last day. WALLACE: Who makes that decision? DANIELS: I think it has — at least a part of it has to be the family and the patient himself or herself. I mean there — (CROSSTALK) WALLACE: Does the government at some point say we can’t afford to give the 92-year-old the liver transplant? DANIELS: Chris, I’ve told you, I think with some specificity, what I think ought to happen in Social Security and Medicare. I just answered the question honestly. I think this problem will have to be addressed. I don’t pretend to have an exact answer to this one, except that autopilot won’t work. And surprisingly, it’s Chris Wallace who points this out to Daniels, who, realizing he’s been caught in the very details that make his plan unworkable, just refuses to respond any more. Transcripts below the fold WALLACE: …And at the CPAC conference two weeks ago, you talked about the greatest threat facing this country. Let’s watch. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DANIELS: We face an enemy lethal (inaudible) and even more implacable than those America has defeated before. I refer, of course, to the debt our nation has amassed for itself over decades of indulgences. It is the new red menace, this time consisting of ink. (END VIDEO CLIP) WALLACE: I want to do a lightning round because we have limited time. Quick questions, quick answers. What would you do about Social Security? DANIELS: I would bifurcate it. I would say those in the program or approaching it, a deal is a deal, you’re good to go, nothing changes. For the young people who are paying for today’s retirees and tomorrow’s, we want you to have something when you retire. We will need a brand new compact. I think it starts with means testing, which is to say we shouldn’t send a pension check to Donald Trump. We should concentrate the resources on those who are going to need them the most. I think we should in the future raise the retirement age to catch up to the medical reality of our time. I think we should protect the benefits against inflation, but not overprotect them. Chris, as I said many times in the past, that is my cut at it. If somebody has another route that gets us with assurance to the same results, I would like to hear it, because I just want to see a solution to this before it destroys the America we know. WALLACE: You talked about Medicare 2.0, private vouchers, not a government program? DANIELS: It will be a government program, but instead of a top- down monstrosity that we have today, once again I would divide the program and say to those who are in it or who are about to be in it, nothing will change for you. But I think for the young people coming up who are going to shoulder the bill, we ought to trust them to make more of their own decisions. You could, again, concentrate the resources on the poorest people, and also in this case the least healthy people, people who are better off — WALLACE: But you’d give them a private voucher so they could choose their own insurance plan? DANIELS: I would. WALLACE: You even say the government should put limits on end- of-life care. Are you talking about what Sarah Palin called the death panels? DANIELS: No, I didn’t say government should put limits on this, but what I’m worried about is the government making these decisions. I just stated what I think is a simple fact. I wish it wasn’t, but I think it is. We cannot afford in an aging society to pay for the most expensive technology every — for every single person regardless of income to the very, very last day. WALLACE: Who makes that decision? DANIELS: I think it has — at least a part of it has to be the family and the patient himself or herself. I mean there — (CROSSTALK) WALLACE: Does the government at some point say we can’t afford to give the 92-year-old the liver transplant? DANIELS: Chris, I’ve told you, I think with some specificity, what I think ought to happen in Social Security and Medicare. I just answered the question honestly. I think this problem will have to be addressed. I don’t pretend to have an exact answer to this one, except that autopilot won’t work.
Continue reading …New MSNBC Host Martin Bashir Lashes Out at ‘Disingenuous’ Move by Tea Party Congressman
February 28, 2011 No Comment
On his first day at MSNBC, new host Martin Bashir immediately adopted the network's liberal line, attacking a conservative Congressman for advocating severe spending cuts, deriding it as ” the most disingenuous play on the American people .” Previewing the interview with Representative Joe Walsh of Illinois, Bashir noted that he has refused congressional health care. The anchor solemnly wondered, “Is that his idea of health care for every American?” Bashir, who previously co-anchored ABC's Nightline, offered this loaded question to the Republican: “You're a freshman in this Congress. Are you satisfied that your first significant act in Washington will help bring the government to a standstill?” The cable host closed out this interview and then snidely segueing to his next guest: “And for more on the political ramifications of this budget battle, including, hopefully, a little truth serum, let's bring in NBC news analyst and senior political editor at the Huffington Post, Howard Fineman.” A transcript of the segment, which aired at 3:10pm EST, follows: MARTIN BASHIR: And when we come back, a congressman who refuses health care, even with a wife who has a preexisting condition. Is that his idea of health care for every American? 3:13 BASHIR: Now to the possible government shutdown looming at end of the week. Both parties say they're considering a Republican plan to keep things up and running, but the clock is ticking. Speaker of the House John Boehner says continuing to do the people's work, well, it's a moral issue. SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE JOHN BOEHNER: We have a moral responsibility to address the problems that we face and that means working together to cut spending and to rein in government, not shutting it down. BASHIR: Congressman Joe Walsh is a Republican from Illinois and he joins me live from the capitol. Mr. Walsh, good afternoon. REP. JOE WALSH: Good afternoon, Martin. Congrats on the show. BASHIR: Thank you very much. You're a freshman in this Congress. Are you satisfied that your first significant act in Washington will help bring the government to a standstill? WALSH: You know, absolutely. Republicans have been clear that we don't want a shut down government. And I think it's very impressive that we sent a two-week- a two-week budget over to the Democrats in the Senate to try to keep the dialogue going so that we can avoid shutting down government. But, Martin, make no mistake, they sent us here to cut spending, and that's what's in this two-week CR. BASHIR: Let's just sit for a moment on the cutting and spending. Isn't this the most disingenuous play on the American people? Because from Planned Parenthood to collective bargaining in Wisconsin, spending cuts is the excuse. But the real target, well, that's your political opponents. WALSH: No. You know what? Martin, spending cuts are the real truth. That's why 87 Republican freshmen were sent to Washington. The Speaker alluded to it as a moral issue. It is a moral issue. Our country's broke and that's because we're spending too much. We're on a path right now that's going to bankrupt our kids and grand kids and that's morally irresponsible. That's almost criminal to do to future generations. The Republicans are keeping their word, and we're systemically going to go at the spending problem. BASHIR: You've said President Obama ought to be ashamed of himself for not dealing with- for not dealing with entitlements in his budget. You say it's time to raise the retirement age and means test Social Security. But, do you have support from Speaker John Boehner? WALSH: Absolutely. Look at Paul Ryan. Look at Paul Ryan to the north of me in Wisconsin. He has been a leader on this. He stuck his neck out last year and proposed reforms of Medicare and Social Security. Martin, I stand by those words. The President put out a budget and he should be ashamed of himself because he punted on entitlement reform. And everybody in this town knows that you've got to have a serious dialogue about Social Security and Medicare because that's where the bulk of the spending is. The Republicans are not going to be afraid to take the lead on this. And I think the American people are ready for that discussion. BASHIR: Is it true that your own wife has decided to reject any health care insurance at this time? WALSH: I pledged a year ago that, if I were elected, I'd turn down all congressional health care and retirement benefits. I just don't believe, as a member of Congress, you should take those. I don't want to increase the federal footprint, no matter how much it costs. It means a lot to me. And my wife was with me every step of the way. She had a procedure last week, Martin. She did have a preexisting condition and like a lot of Americans
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media CNN’s Candy Crowley spoke to Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman about the situation in Libya and whether the United States should get more involved in supporting the uprising there. Of course they think we should be imposing a no-fly zone and providing arms to the protesters so they can defend themselves. So as usual they want the Unites States injecting themselves militarily into another Middle Eastern country and potentially into the middle of another country’s civil war. What could possibly go wrong? And McCain had lots of tough talk about war crimes tribunals for the mercenaries brought in by Muammar Gaddafi. Too bad he doesn’t feel the same way about what we did to the Iraqis. Transcript via CNN . CROWLEY: Senators, thank you both for joining us after what has been a particularly busy week for you I know. Let me start some place that I know you haven’t been but which is in the headlines now and that’s Libya. The U.S. and the U.N. have frozen Libyan assets. They have imposed an arms embargo. They have banned travel for Gadhafi and some of his top aids. They have referred what Gadhafi has done to his own people, which is turn his army on them, has been referred to a criminal court and yet there is no change in behavior. Senator Lieberman first to you, is there anything that you believe could change the behavior of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi? LIEBERMAN: Well, this is a real moment of choice for the international community. Believe me, what we are hearing is the Arab world is watching. Will the future be the peaceful democratic revolution that’s occurred in Egypt leading to democracy or will the world stand by and allow a leader like Gadhafi to slaughter his people? I’m glad there are sanctions being applied and some pressure morally at least and some economic put on Gadhafi, but honestly I think the world has to do more. I begin with the imposition of a no-fly zone so that Gadhafi can’t be attacking his own people from the air or flying in more mercenaries. I think we ought to recognize the opposition provisional government as the legitimate government of Libya and we that ought to give that government certainly humanitarian assistance and military arms, not to go in on the ground ourselves but to give them the wherewithal to fight on behalf of the people of Libya against a really cruel dictator. CROWLEY: And Senator McCain, Senator Lieberman brings me to my next question which is, is there a military option, Senator McCain, as far as you’re concerned in Libya for the U.S. or for NATO or the U.N.? Is there a military option other than to try to enforce a no-fly zone? MCCAIN: Well, I think there possibly could be. But look a no- fly zone, Libyan pilots aren’t going to fly if there is a no-fly zone and we could get air assets there to ensure it. Recognize some provisional government that they are trying to set already up in the eastern part of Libya, help them with material assistance, make sure that every one of the mercenaries know that any acts they commit they will find themselves in front a war crimes tribunal. Get tough. And I understand that America’s security and safety of American citizens is our highest priority. It is not our only priority. CROWLEY: You sound slightly critical, if I’m reading between the lines, of the Obama administration kind of holding back on its criticism of Libya, administration officials tell us because they were worried that Americans in Libya would be taken hostage or worse. MCCAIN: Well, the British prime minister and the French president and others were not hesitant and they have citizens in that country. America leads. America is — here we’ve been to these countries and every place we go they are looking to America for leadership, for assistance, for moral support and ratification of the sacrifices they have made in defense of democracy. America should lead. The president should reverse the terrible decision he made in 2009 to not support the demonstrators in Tehran. Stand up for democracy in Iran and tell those people that we are with them. And that should be true not only throughout the Arab countries but as far as china and other parts of the world as well. CROWLEY: Senator Lieberman, the president has said it’s time for Gadhafi to go, that he’s turned weaponry on his own people and no one could lead like that and he should leave. It seems to me that you all are going a step further. So to you senator, first of all do you agree that the president has been too slow to criticize Moammar Gadhafi? And it seems to me that you were suggesting that we should send weapons to rebel forces. LIEBERMAN: I understand why the administration hesitated at the beginning because of the concern about American personnel at the embassy but frankly, I wish we had spoken out much more clearly and early against the Gadhafi regime. And we have lines of communication certainly through the foreign ministry and we could have told them at the same time we were condemning Colonel Gadhafi’s brutality that if he laid a finger on any American who was there he would pay for it and pay for it dearly. The fact is now is the time for action, not just statements. The sanctions that were adopted but unilaterally by the United States and now by the U.S. really have some effect on the people in the top positions in the Libyan government and hopefully it will lead them to think twice. But the kinds of tangible support, no-fly zone, recognition of the revolutionary government, the citizens government and support for them with both humanitarian assistance and I would provide them with arms. This takes me back to the ’90s in the Balkans when we intervened to stop a genocide against Bosnians. And the first we did was to provide them the arms to defend themselves. That’s what I think we ought to do in Libya. I hope that the opposition forces may end all of this by going into Libya and taking it over and ending the Gadhafi regime. But if they don’t, we should help them. MCCAIN: Candy, I think his days are numbered. The question is how many people are going to massacred between now and when he leaves? We ought to shorten that time frame as much as possible. I believe we can.
Continue reading …Fox anchors and reporters really don’t like it when Madison protesters tell the truth: ‘Fox News lies’
February 28, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Bill O’Reilly already laid down the law at Fox — namely, that protesters chanting “Fox News Lies” are obviously a bunch of hatemongers trying to shut down other voices. And so that was the storyline all weekend whenever Fox reporters tried to do live broadcasts from the Madison protests. This mainly involved correspondent Mike Tobin and weekend lamestain anchor Gregg Jarrett, who could barely contain themselves over the supposed “incivility” of the Madison protests. When the chant went up Saturday, Tobin tried to minimize them: TOBIN: Now, once again, they’re chanting about Fox News — which as we all know is really a diversion from what’s going on here. Jarrett then went on to cite a phony Rasmussen poll supposedly showing most respondents disapproving of the legislators staying out of town to fight Gov. Scott Walker’s union-busting schemes — without mentioning, of course, the polls showing strong public disapproval for Walker’s actions as well. Gee, we wonder why the crowds were chanting as they were. It continued Sunday: TOBIN: And you can still hear the passion of the crowds. The heckling is starting up again, the hate that you get from these demonstrators. You can see it in their faces. You can see the passion. But they all come back to the same thing every time. I was getting the business from a teacher yesterday — there he goes, he wants to shut down the communication. A teacher was giving me the business yesterday, and the teacher told me she hates me, because it makes her feel good. That’s the situation out here, Gregg. JARRETT: You know, Mike, I hate to put you into this situation, because you’re being surrounded there, and yeah, you’re being heckled, and there is profanity and vulgarity. TOBIN: That guy just hit me. JARRETT: Go ahead. TOBIN: Ah, that guy just hit me. So to just let you know. JARRETT: All right. But — but — you know — why do they express such vitriol toward the media? Memo to Jarrett: Fox News is neither synonymous with nor really even representative of “the media”, especially as far as this crowd is concerned. Because the folks in Madison know — and are giving voice to — an important truth: Fox News is not a news organization, it is a propaganda organ. That truth is embodied, in fact, by the way Fox has consistently tried to smear the crowds in Wisconsin as “hate-filled” and violent — when in fact the opposite has been largely true, particularly compared to the vitriol we saw at Tea Party rallies against health-care reform that were whipped up by Fox News the year before. Digby has a fine sample of this, but you can see it just in these segments as well. And then Fox expects the very crowds that it is smearing before national audiences to sit still and let them smear them freely on-air? Sorry, fellas, but the real world doesn’t work that way — though you’d like it otherwise in your alternative universe, no doubt. Moreover, this isn’t a diversionary issue: The crowds understand the importance of Fox’s relentless propaganda in advancing the war against the nation’s unions that the Right is undertaking. Indeed, they know that Fox is a major cornerstone of this war, because it entails convincing working-class people — much of Fox’s audience — to take sides against their own best interests. The Madison protesters understand that the messaging war is being won because the Right has a powerful propaganda organ whose success is dragging not just the national dialogue but the rest of the media (the Beltway Villagers especially) rightward with them. Good on them. And the less whining we hear from Fox reporters, the better.You made your beds — now sleep in it.
Continue reading …Maddow: Fox Isn’t a News Channel – It’s a ‘McCarthyite Chamber of Horrors’
February 28, 2011 No Comment
The presumptive face of the most biased and propagandist television news outlet in America had some harsh words for the media organization that bests hers in ratings virtually every hour of every day. In a piece published by the Daily Beast Sunday, Rachel Maddow hypocritically told Howard Kurtz that Fox News has “become a McCarthyite chamber of horrors… You can't really call yourself a news channel if that's what you broadcast”: In the Olbermann tradition, Maddow is increasingly denouncing Fox, saying that Glenn Beck, in monologues about Muslims, has been “running baroque conspiracies that are designed to freak people out about bogeymen coming to get them, conspiracies that are unsupported by the facts.” Fox, she charges, has “become a McCarthyite chamber of horrors… You can't really call yourself a news channel if that's what you broadcast.” Maddow's repeated attacks have not provoked a response from Fox. This coming from a woman that has recently been skewered by NewsBusters, Politifact, and the Baltimore Sun's David Zurawik for her highly-partisan, often false statements on air. In the past ten days alone, Maddow has come under fire for a number of clearly erroneous comments she's made about the union battle in Wisconsin. Kurtz even addressed this on CNN's “Reliable Sources” Sunday, but failed to point it out in his rather glowing column: While the host devours information online, stuffing printouts in thick folders, there are missteps. She touted an item on the website ChristWire urging Sarah Palin to speak out on Egypt—unaware that it was a satirical blog with such headlines as ARE FACEBOOK SEX GANGS USING “WIKILEAKS” TO TARGET YOUR TEENS? (Maddow good-naturedly confessed her error on Twitter.) Indeed, but that was weeks ago and clearly a trifle compared to what she stepped in last Thursday when she claimed Wisconsin had a budget surplus. As Kurtz was going to be interviewing Politifact's editor about this episode on the same day his profile of Maddow was to be published, it is quite curious why he didn't mention it in his piece. Consider, too, that Politifact has to date reviewed eleven statements by Maddow finding four false, one barely true, three half-true, two mostly true, and only one completely true. That means she was scored 100 percent right in only nine percent of their analyses. And this woman has the nerve to say Fox isn't a news channel.
Continue reading …Maddow: Fox Isn’t a News Channel – It’s a ‘McCarthyite Chamber of Horrors’
February 28, 2011 No CommentThe presumptive face of the most biased and propagandist television news outlet in America had some harsh words for the media organization that bests hers in ratings virtually every hour of every day. In a piece published by the Daily Beast Sunday, Rachel Maddow hypocritically told Howard Kurtz that Fox News has “become a McCarthyite chamber of horrors… You can't really call yourself a news channel if that's what you broadcast”: In the Olbermann tradition, Maddow is increasingly denouncing Fox, saying that Glenn Beck, in monologues about Muslims, has been “running baroque conspiracies that are designed to freak people out about bogeymen coming to get them, conspiracies that are unsupported by the facts.” Fox, she charges, has “become a McCarthyite chamber of horrors… You can't really call yourself a news channel if that's what you broadcast.” Maddow's repeated attacks have not provoked a response from Fox. This coming from a woman that has recently been skewered by NewsBusters, Politifact, and the Baltimore Sun's David Zurawik for her highly-partisan, often false statements on air. In the past ten days alone, Maddow has come under fire for a number of clearly erroneous comments she's made about the union battle in Wisconsin. Kurtz even addressed this on CNN's “Reliable Sources” Sunday, but failed to point it out in his rather glowing column: While the host devours information online, stuffing printouts in thick folders, there are missteps. She touted an item on the website ChristWire urging Sarah Palin to speak out on Egypt—unaware that it was a satirical blog with such headlines as ARE FACEBOOK SEX GANGS USING “WIKILEAKS” TO TARGET YOUR TEENS? (Maddow good-naturedly confessed her error on Twitter.) Indeed, but that was weeks ago and clearly a trifle compared to what she stepped in last Thursday when she claimed Wisconsin had a budget surplus. As Kurtz was going to be interviewing Politifact's editor about this episode on the same day his profile of Maddow was to be published, it is quite curious why he didn't mention it in his piece. Consider, too, that Politifact has to date reviewed eleven statements by Maddow finding four false, one barely true, three half-true, two mostly true, and only one completely true. That means she was scored 100 percent right in only nine percent of their analyses. And this woman has the nerve to say Fox isn't a news channel.
Continue reading …
Numbers in Madison appear to have approached 100,000, yet there is a near media blackout. If it wasn’t for liberal media web sites, blogs, and Youtube, who outside Madison would know anything happened? Joan Walsh writes about the media blackout , and Paul Krugman says it reminds him of the anti-war rallies in 2003 that drew millions into the streets, and most media wouldn’t mention them. And here are… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : MN Progressive Project Discovery Date : 27/02/2011 16:16 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …Only After Awful Attacks on Logan: LAT’s Rainey Doesn’t Like Tone of Readers’ Comments
February 27, 2011 No Comment“It seems long past time for reputable news sites to clamp down on the gutter talk.” That is James Rainey, the “On the Media” critic at the Los Angeles Times, fretting in an article today (Sun., 2/27/11) about the tone of readers' comments that are posted on news web sites. If Rainey wants to “clamp down on the gutter talk” by readers,
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said Sunday that thousands of demonstrators had not caused him to reconsider his plan to strip unions of collective bargaining rights. NBC’s David Gregory asked Walker why he refused a proposal by unions to accept his demand that they contribute more to pension and health care benefits if he dropped the proposal to end collective bargaining rights. “If the unions, who it seems to me have been clear in saying that they would agree to those extra contributions, if they did that, and you say you’re concerned about the budget shortfall, why not accept that?” Gregory wondered. “But my point is, they can’t,” Walker replied. “There are 1,000-plus municipalities, more than 424 school districts, 72 counties, I know, I used to be a county executive for eight years. I know that collective bargaining has to be done in every jurisdiction. They can’t guarantee that.” “Governor, if you’re really serious about the state being broke, you have a deal that you could take, to get the contributions you need to solve the problem at hand. Why not separate that out from your views about collective bargaining?” Gregory pressed. “But, David, my point is repeatedly, as a former local government official, I know that collective bargaining has a cost and when I’m cutting more than $1 billion from aid to local governments, in this next two-year budget, I need to do what no other governor is doing across the country.” The Republican governor repeated his threat that if 14 Democrats in the state Senate didn’t return to vote on the bill, he would be forced to layoff workers. “If we don’t get these changes and the Senate Democrats don’t come back, we’ll be forced to make up the savings in layoffs and that’s unacceptable,” he said.
Continue reading …NPR Insists Buffalo Wife’s Beheading by Muslim Outreach TV Founder Has No Islamic Overtones
February 27, 2011 No Comment
Almost the entire media skipped this chilling honor-killing verdict from Arizona on Tuesday, from Reuters : “An Arizona jury on Tuesday found an Iraqi immigrant guilty of second-degree murder for running down his daughter with a Jeep because she had become too Westernized.” Faleh Almaleki killed his daughter Noor in October 2009 because she spurned his arranged marriage and was living with her boyfriend. Apparently, to report this is to be “Islamophobic.” NPR skipped Almaleki, but they noted the verdict in another horrific killing on Monday night's All Things Considered: Aasiya Hassan was beheaded by her husband Mozzamil in 2009 as the two headed a Buffalo television project designed to create better understanding about Muslims. NPR reporter Dina Temple-Raston's objective was to deny this crime was about Islam. Instead, she said, it was simply about domestic violence. NPR anchor Robert Siegel tried to explain that “at the time, the media seized on the murder as an honor killing. That's a killing allowed in some Muslim societies when shame has been brought on a family. But NPR's Dina Temple-Raston reports from Buffalo, the Hassan case is really about domestic violence and it forced an entire community to reckon with stereotypes.” “The media” didn't exactly seize on Aasiya Hassan. But Glenn Beck did, and some local news outlets. Temple-Raston was insisting Beck and Company were all wrong, that they were purveying negative stereotypes. She went directly to Dr. Khalid Qazi for her thesis, a man she said “looks like Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch in 'To Kill a Mockingbird.'” She did not explain he was a head of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, a professional spin controller on these issues, or that Dr. Qazi recently welcomed Ground Zero Mosque imam Faisal Abdul-Rauf to Buffalo: Dr. QAZI: Nobody in the community can get their arms around that notion that he would not only kill her, he would stab her 40, 50 and perhaps 60 times and then decapitate her. There's absolutely no stomach for that. TEMPLE-RASTON: Because she was Muslim, because of the way she was killed, and because Aasiya Hassan had filed for divorce just days before the murder, the media assumed that the killing was sanctioned by Islam. Unidentified Woman Anchor: A brutal crime in Buffalo, New York. A Pakistani-born man is accused of beheading his wife, and there's speculation it may be a so-called honor killing. Mr. GLENN BECK (Host, “The Glenn Beck Program”): All right. This guy started a Muslim-American cable TV network to challenge stereotypes about his faith. You know, apparently, we're just too stupid. We just all think that all Muslims are bad. TEMPLE-RASTON: That was Glenn Beck talking about the case. In fact, the Muslim community was being stereotyped. Dr. Qazi said news of the murder was everywhere. Dr. QAZI: So there is this constant reminder of this monster who we all tried to project and help to establish a lifestyle television channel to show who we are and what we stand for and then we get this. TEMPLE-RASTON: Buffalo's Muslim community had already had its share of these kinds of stories. There were suspicions after the 911 attacks. And then, to make matters worse, a year after 911, six young Muslims from the Lackawanna community, just outside of Buffalo, were arrested and pleaded guilty to training at an al-Qaeda camp. Against that backdrop, stereotyping was easy. This had to be an honor killing, except it wasn't. The idea that Mo Hassan's murder was “everywhere” is simply untrue. As I noted at the time , the national media (including for a while, NPR) were certainly not picking up the story, despite the enormous news hook of “Muslim-understanding czar beheads wife.” The outlets that did report it predictably downplayed the Muslim angle. But pay attention to that part about the Lackawanna Six. Temple-Raston wrote an entire book on those terrorists in training called The Jihad Next Door. At Amazon, the Booklist review crackles with how this NPR reporter exposes the dark age of Bush: As she sensitively portrays each of the five men currently behind bars, she reveals their dire na
Continue reading …