MSNBC's Monica Novotny: "Confusion in the health care debate: Should the WH blame town halls, the GOP, conservative media outlets, or itself?"
Notice what's missing from that list of possible culprits? Yep: MSNBC and other media outlets. Lousy health care reporting hasn't been limited to just conservative media outlets.
Even today, MSNBC has told us over and over again that there is confusion, and speculated about why there is confusion. What hasn't MSNBC done? Spent any significant time giving people detailed, factual explanations of health care. Instead, we've gotten stuff like this.
Last week, Media Matters for America documented that JC Penney was one of several companies that recently advertised on Rush Limbaugh's hate-filled radio show, despite having been included on a 2006 list of advertisers that reportedly requested that none of their ads be broadcast during Air America programs.
According to a tip from a Media Matters reader, JC Penney is now stating that its "company policy is to run no advertising on any programming that is political or religious in nature - and that includes the Rush Limbaugh show."
Media Matters has the audio of a JC Penney ad that aired on New York's WABC-AM at the beginning of Limbaugh's May 29 show at 12:06 p.m. ET.
Here's the text of the email JC Penney reportedly sent:
Thank you for contacting us online.
Our company policy is to run no advertising on any programming that is political or religious in nature - and that includes the Rush Limbaugh show. We have a record of supporting candidates ? Democrat and Republican -- that have an interest in issues that are important to the retail industry.
We welcome comments and suggestions from our customers that call matters to our attention and enable us to address each issue. Customer concerns are always forwarded to the proper areas responsible for the issue. Your comments are a great help toward increasing satisfaction of all JCPenney customers.
As a company servicing half of America's families for over 100 years, our customers have come to know JCPenney as their trusted retail partner.
At JCPenney, what matters to you, matters to us. Customers like you are our most valuable resource for creating the optimal shopping experience.
Thank you for taking the time to share your input. We look forward to
serving you in the future.
JCP.com Customer Service
Every Day Matters
On Monday, we posted the text of a similar email apparently sent by Home Depot asserting that Home Depot doesn't "support the Rush Limbaugh radio show." Media Matters posted audio of a Home Depot ad that did, in fact, air during Limbaugh's show.
He's been chasing his tail over the whole Nazi-mini-mob connection for more than a week now and honestly, it's sorta sad to watch.
TWS is peeved that anyone would think that right-wingers protesting health reform would brandish Nazi posters and talk about Hitler. TWS's frustration is palpable. (Building a political movement around Hitler posters? Not such a good idea.) But it's obviously misdirected. If deep thinkers at places like TWS think it's wrong to bring swastika posters to town hall rallies, than why doesn't TWS condemn it?
And more importantly, if TWS thinks only "idiots" talk about Hitler as part of our national discourse, why doesn't anybody get up the nerve to call out Rush Limbaugh when he does it? I asked this question last week and never did get a response, so I'll ask it again: Has anyone at TWS condemned Limbaugh, either in print or online, for recently equating the Obama White House with a Nazi organization? Anyone?
We'll see if McCormack can follow this rather obvious logic: If the most-listened-to conservative in the country openly refers to Obama and his administration as being Nazi-like, and then nobody in the Right says boo about it, guess what? Mini-mob members (and self-identified "conservative" "Republicans") take that as a green light to bring Nazi posters and yell "Heil Hitler" at rallies.
So until TWS gets up the nerve to, y'know actually disagree with Rush Limbaugh, save us the lectures about how nobody on the right would dare evoke Nazi and Hitler. It's laughable, because the guy who runs the GOP does it all the time.
This morning, NBC News' First Read reports that the "rampant misinformation" conservatives have been flooding the zone with is deceiving the American public about the health care reform plans of President Obama and congressional Democrats. Wonder of wonders, they even admit that they are partially at fault, stating that "credible messengers" have been "using the media to get some of this misinformation out there," which they say should "worry… the news media that have been covering the story":
*** Rampant misinformation: One of the reasons why the public appears so wary about Obama's health-care plans is due to all the misinformation out there. Majorities in the poll believe the plans would give health insurance coverage to illegal immigrants (55%), would lead to a government takeover of the health system (54%), and would use taxpayer dollars to pay for women to have abortions (50%) -- all claims that nonpartisan fact-checkers say are untrue about the legislation that has emerged so far from Congress. Additionally, 45% think the reform proposals would allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care for the elderly, which also isn't true. When you have nearly half of the public believing that the government is willing to pull the plug on grandma, you're in trouble.
*** FOX vs. CNN/MSNBC: Here's another way to look at the misinformation: In our poll, 72% of self-identified FOX News viewers believe the health-care plan will give coverage to illegal immigrants, 79% of them say it will lead to a government takeover, 69% think that it will use taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions, and 75% believe that it will allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing care for the elderly. But it would be incorrect to suggest that this is ONLY coming from conservative viewers who tune in to FOX. In fact, 41% of CNN/MSNBC viewers believe the misinformation about illegal immigrants, 39% believe the government takeover stuff, 40% believe the abortion misperception, and 30% believe the stuff about pulling the plug on grandma. What's more, a good chunk of folks who get their news from broadcast TV (NBC, ABC, CBS) believe these things, too. This is about credible messengers using the media to get some of this misinformation out there, not as much about the filter itself. These numbers should worry Democratic operatives, as well as the news media that have been covering this story.
Surely, in the wake of these results, NBC News must be redoubling its efforts to ensure that its own airwaves are not conduits for such misinformation, right? And yet, from the same Nightly News broadcast in which those poll results were detailed:
NBC News correspondent Tom Costello falsely reported that the health care income surtax in the House tri-committee bill could mean a surcharge of $7,000 for those "with a taxable income of more than $350,000" and a surcharge of $15,000 for those "earning $500,000." In fact, since the surcharge rates established in the bill would apply only to the portion of a household's income that exceeds $350,000 or $500,000, respectively, families making between $350,000 and $500,000 would not pay more than $1,500, and families making between $500,000 and $1 million would not pay more than $9,000.
Oops. I guess they still aren't "worr[ied]" enough to do some basic fact-checking before they air their stories. Maybe next time?
More from Andrea Mitchell:
Medicare has not controlled costs to the satisfaction of the fiscal hawks. And people worried about the deficit say that Medicare is the worst possible paradigm for a new, expanded health care system.
Hmmm. Do people who are really worried about the deficit say this -- or do people who say they are worried about the deficit say this?
See, Medicare has very low overhead costs, and Medicare costs have grown at a much slower rate than costs for private insurance. To the extent that the Medicare system faces financing trouble, it is largely a result of a growth in health care costs, not of a flaw in Medicare itself.
And the people who Mitchell is referring to oppose health care reforms that would do the most to control skyrocketing health care costs -- things like single-payer, or a public option. And as Paul Krugman recently noted, "There has been a lot of publicity about Blue Dog opposition to the public option, and rightly so: a plan without a public option to hold down insurance premiums would cost taxpayers more than a plan with such an option."
So, aside from her apparent lack of understanding of why Medicare costs have increased, Mitchell is unjustifiably crediting critics of reform with being "worried about the deficit." We don't know that they're actually worried about the deficit, or capable of understanding how it can be reduced. All we know is that they say they are worried about the deficit. So that's all Mitchell should say; anything else is mind-reading.
Actually, that's not quite right: She should also note that they oppose the very proposals that would do the most to keep the deficit in check.
(Also worth noting: It is not the case, as Mitchell suggests, that "people worried about the deficit" are united in the belief that Medicare would make a poor model for health care reform.)
From an August 19 Politico article:
Already, twenty companies have agreed to pull advertisements from Glenn Beck's television show, within weeks of the Fox host calling Obama "a racist" and saying the president "has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture."
Now, Farmers Insurance can be added to that list, a Farmers spokesperson confirms to POLITICO.
"We advertise on Fox News Channel which places our ads in the Network programming, and we ceased placing on Glenn Beck a week ago," said the spokesperson.
Just because advertisers pull ads from Beck's show doesn't mean the network will lose any money.
A Fox News spokesperson told the Daily News yesterday that "advertisers referenced have all moved their spots from Beck to other programs on the network so there has been no revenue lost."
ColorOfChange.org, an African-American online political organization, has been targeting advertisers, while others, like RedState defend Beck in the midst of this boycott.
Andrea Mitchell to Sen. Bernie Sanders, moments ago:
"Why is this so important? Is it better to have nothing than to have a plan that does not include the public option?"
It seems to me that framing -- a choice between nothing and what liberals want -- is common, while conservatives don't face such questions in the health care debate.
So here's a challenge for Andrea Mitchell: The next time you interview a Ben Nelson or a Joe Lieberman or a Mary Landrieu or a Chuck Grassley, ask them "Is it better to have nothing than to have a plan that includes the public option."
The right-wing blogoshere remains a joke because it's led by dopes. (Simple answers to simple questions, right?) It's led by people like Andrew Breitbart who launched a site earlier this year, Big Hollywood, in hopes of leading conservatives out of the Internet wilderness. Supposedly, Breitbart got it. He got the blogosphere and pop culture and the future of mass communication, and he was going to help the Noise Machine play catch-up.
But it turns out Andrew Breitbart is just another right-wing conspiracy loon who couldn't get published anywhere that employed a fact-checker. Andrew Breitbart, as he proves week after week, is sorta nuts, which means the Rightroots movement will remain stuck in neutral as long as people like him are at the helm.
Behold the wonder as Andrew (call-me-Kenneth-Gladney) Breitbart explains how the world really works:
UPDATED: Here, a conservative writer laments Breitbart's constant embrace of (fictional) victimhood.
From the August 19 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
Goldberg actually scores extra points for hypocrisy because he embraces a blatant double standard while accusing others of having a double standard [emphasis added].
Now, I'm not asking you to do this so that you might be able to see through the glare of Obama's halo or the outlines of the media's staggering double standard when it comes to covering this White House. Rather, it is to grasp that the Obama administration has been astoundingly incompetent.
Lashing out at the town hall protesters, playing the race card, whining about angry white men and whispering ominously about right-wing militias is almost always a sign of liberalism's weakness - a failure of the imagination.
How has the Obama administration played "the race card" during the health care debate? Goldberg, as is his firm tradition of never actually practicing journalism, never bothers to explain or detail. He just likes the way the accusation sounds. Conservatives love to tar the other side by suggesting they have a habit of "playing the race card" and that it makes them weak and untrustworthy. Right-wingers like Goldberg can't stand it when folks start "playing the race card."
Except when Glenn Beck does it.
Except when Glenn Beck claims Obama has a deep seated hatred for white people and when Beck calls Obama a "racist." When Beck recent unfurled that shocking race-card claim, Goldberg (a frequent guest on Beck's show) shifted into apologist mode and quickly explained to National Review readers why it was perfectly acceptable. The way Goldberg saw it, if Goldberg thought the President of the United States was a racist, than he ought to say so. If Beck thought the incendiary claim was true, than Beck practically owed it to his fans to play the race card. Hard.
So to review: Goldberg concocted his claim the White House was "playing the race card" and then condemned the phantom ploy. This, just weeks after Goldberg defended Beck's race-based smear of Obama.
Great work, National Review.
UPDATED: Don't know if Goldberg is still on his comical search for Nazi and Hitler posters, references, etc. among town hall mini-mob members (he claims they don't exist), but if he is, he might want to check this latest viral sensation. And yes, she's a "conservative" "Republican."