Media Matters: The week that followed the end of America as we know it
This week was a big deal, folks. And it's not because America, as we know it, is over. Congress passed major health care reform legislation -- even though the media declared it "dead" just two months ago -- and President Obama signed it into law.
On Monday, we rubbed our eyes after a long, difficult year of debate, took a look around, and realized two things had happened that would affect our lives: The U.S. has a new health care system that extends benefits to millions of the uninsured, and Rush Limbaugh decided he is not moving to Costa Rica after all.
When "Armageddon" didn't rain down after health care was passed, as the conservative media warned that it would, Fox News and the noise machine scrambled to find new ways to delegitimize the law, basically hurling every argument possible at it to see what stuck.
Here's what they came up with: On-the-fence Democrats who voted "aye" were BRIBED!
The Drudge Report, Bret Baier, Eric Bolling, Betsy McCaughey, and right-wing blogs saw something fishy behind federal grants given to airports in Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-MI) district and suggested that the funds may have bought his vote. (No matter that the grants were awarded in 47 states, including in Republican districts.) Fox News' Andrew Napolitano claimed Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) "changed his vote to yes" after his brother was offered a judgeship. (Oops: Matheson voted against the bill.) Napolitano also accused Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV) of changing his vote after the Justice Department ended an ethics investigation on him. (Mollohan's vote was the same before and after the investigation ended.)
The media also revived the falsehood that the bill funds abortions with taxpayer dollars, focusing their attacks on Stupak over his support for finalizing the bill. Gateway Pundit seized on Rep. Randy Neugebauer's (R-TX) accusation that Stupak supported a "baby-killer" bill, and Glenn Beck said Stupak was going to "lose his soul" and that he wanted to be "right behind" Stupak at eternal judgment.
The conservative media also pushed the idea that the law could be voided because it isn't constitutional. By Wednesday, Fox News had interviewed at least nine Republican state attorneys general to promote their efforts to overturn the law through lawsuits. The blogs liked that idea, too: HotAir's Ed Morrissey said the courts "seem like a fruitful place to deconstruct ObamaCare."
Legal scholars, however, dispute that the law is unconstitutional, noting that regulation of the health care sector falls under Congress' broad power to regulate interstate commerce. Even Newt Gingrich, who said he's "glad" the AGs are suing, called winning an "outside chance."
As always, claims about the bill and its supporters devolved to baseless name-calling. There was the creative: health reform is like the Black Plague, the Jonestown massacre, the Day the Music Died, etc. The shameless: health reform is like Pearl Harbor and the Hindenburg. The old and tired: "The Democratic Party now officially is the Socialist Party." And the bottom of the barrel: cost analysts at the Congressional Budget Office are just a "bunch of liars."
The debate this week also took a very serious turn toward violence. When news broke that several Democrats in Congress had been threatened with physical violence and racial and anti-gay epithets, the conservative media initially condemned it. And then they accused, and denied, and rationalized.
Gretchen Carlson said it's "disappointing" that Democrats decided to publicly discuss the threats because it's "such a political thing" and suggested they "stop discussing it altogether." Brian Kilmeade asked whether Democrats were "using" the threats "to their advantage to marginalize Republican opposition," and Sean Hannity wondered whether the attention brought to racial slurs was an "effort to smear conservatives."
Andrew Breitbart offered to give $10,000 to the United Negro College Fund if someone could "provide hard evidence that the N- word was hurled" at civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis as he walked through a crowd of tea party activists before the vote. The Fox Nation wasn't quite as sure as Breitbart; one of its headlines asked: "Was Tea Party Story a Racial Rant or a Set-up?" The Washington Times quoted Dale Robertson, founder of teaparty.org, in an article as saying that Democrats are "trying to label the tea party [as racist], but I've never seen any racial slurs." So much for source vetting: Robertson is the tea partier who was reportedly kicked out of a 2009 tea party event at which he carried a sign reading, "Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = Niggar [sic]."
National Review Online's Kathryn Jean Lopez and The Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes both rationalized it in the same way: hey, threats are "commonplace" and they "happen all the time."
What's more, some in the media used the passage of health care legislation to continue their long tradition of violent rhetoric over the health care issue. Beck, who repeatedly stoked fear this week over health care reform passing with violent rhetoric like "war" and "armed insurrection," said the administration was "poking and prodding" and "begging" opponents of the bill to commit violence, and that Obama "punched" Americans in the face with health reform. Beck also compared this time to the "second American Revolution" and wondered if progressives would have "killed us all" if reform had failed.
Sarah Palin took to her Facebook page with a mapped list of House Democrats who voted for health care reform with crosshairs aimed at their locations. In a March 23 tweet about her map, Palin wrote: "Don't Retreat, Instead -- RELOAD!"
Other stories this week
Beck redistributes attacks on Wallis
We noted last week that Rev. Jim Wallis, the editor of Sojourners magazine and Obama adviser, was coming under attack by right-wing media for his advocacy on social justice. This week, the attacks intensified, led by -- you guessed it -- Glenn Beck.
Beck compared Wallis to the "anti-Semitic religious broadcaster" Father Coughlin and accused him of "pervert[ing]" and "distorting the gospel" and promoting "the devil's way." The reason? Beck repeatedly claimed comments Wallis made in 2006 about "absolutely" calling for the "redistribution of wealth" is proof he is a "Marxist" who "claims the gospel of Jesus Christ is about a central government taking money from individuals and then distributing it."
Of course, Beck was using selectively edited audio of Wallis' interview with Interfaith Voices in which he was discussing individuals who "transformed" their lives to focus on charity and highlighting how Bill and Melinda Gates have been "doing a redistribution of wealth" through their philanthropy.
Beck also seized on audio in which Wallis recounted his first meeting with Dorothy Day to claim that Wallis admitted he was a "Marxist." In fact, Wallis recounted discussing with Day their "conversion" from "secular radicalism and Marxism to Jesus Christ." Not to be outdone by Beck, Breitbart.tv posted a Naked Emperor News video that also distorted Wallis' comments to claim he advocated "forced redistribution of wealth."
Wallis responded to Beck in a lengthy March 24 post. He said, in part, about his "redistribution of wealth" comments: "Instead Beck said that what I meant was...you guessed it: 'forced redistribution, socialism, and Marxism.' Hmm, don't ever remember saying that (it will be hard for Fox to find the videos of that), or even remember any of my fellow traveler social justice Christians ever saying or supporting that... But we do say that while social justice begins with our own lives, choices, and sacrifices, it doesn't end there."
Gone witch-huntin': Liu is the latest target in attacks on Obama's judicial nominations
In the latest attack on Obama's judicial nominations, right-wing blogs such as Verum Serum, Atlas Shrugs, and Ace of Spades have distorted comments that appeals court nominee Goodwin Liu made in a 2008 discussion about the legacy of slavery to suggest he supports "reparations."
In fact, nowhere in his speech did Liu state that he supports "reparations"; rather, he suggested that people should deal with the legacy of slavery by working at the community level on issues like "access to food, health care, problems with their houses."
Washington Examiner columnist Theodore H. Frank also claimed Liu was "disqualif[ied]" from that position because he purportedly spoke "against private ownership of property." In fact, Liu merely identified the term "private ownership of property," as used by an organization then-Supreme Court nominee John Roberts was affiliated with, as indicative of "an ideological agenda hostile to environmental, workplace, and consumer protections."
As we noted, Liu reportedly has support from conservatives, including The Goldwater Institute's Clint Bolick, John Yoo -- the Bush administration lawyer who authored the infamous torture memos -- and James Guthrie, education policy studies director at the George W. Bush Institute in Dallas.
This week's media columns
This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert further examines the right-wing meltdown over health care.
Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, and Digg
Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace, and Digg and join in on the discussion.
Media Matters Minute now on YouTube
For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily, minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes / RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.
It hadn't, of course.
And it's just a matter of time before men start marrying horses.
Yup, threats are commonplace and happen all the time.....
In a redneck bar around 1am on Friday night/Saturday morning.
As part of political discourse threats beyond "we will work to vote you out of office" should be dissuaded by all sides.
The actual invective that has been part and parcel of the health care debate, both before and after passage, should shame everyone who is involved in even the slightest way.
Tea Partiers, that would include you too. Want to prove you aren't a bunch of racists?
Then adopt a "No Tolerance" policy. Anyone use any kind of violent rhetoric, signs, etc then kick them out. Publicly!!
You are a hypocrite.
Hypocrisy
I wasn't an Obama supporter, but so far, I really don't have that much to complain about except that he has not allowed his AG to go after the war criminals from the prior administration and he has not gotten rid of the provisions of the Patriot Act and the FISA amendment which are invasive of 4th Amendment rights.
I don't really care what political club a politician belongs to . . . I just want them to act responsibly and to respect our Constitution. Oh, and to be very honest with you Bush was acting a helluva lot more like a dictator than the current president.
"Even the Secret Service has noted that there has been a HUGE increase in threats against the President's life."
What is your point? How is that proof that only conservatives support violence, or that the tea party movement is full of BEck zombies intent on murder and racism? Your extrapolation of circumstanial evidence is ill conceived.
"I don't really care what political club a politician belongs to . . . I just want them to act responsibly and to respect our Constitution. Oh, and to be very honest with you Bush was acting a helluva lot more like a dictator than the current president. "
Again, if you have a problem with Bush, why post here in repsonse to my post? It has nothing to do with the subject.
And there were many, many calls from the left denouncing the Bush = Hitler rhetoric. I, for one, found it objectionable because it made our side look inarticulate. Bush was the worst President in American history. I thought that liberals should avoid cliches and construct verbiage and imagery that arose to the occasion. I mean, Bush was a madman, no question. But that doesn't excuse transgressing against Godwin's Law....
So what?
Bush actually was a screw-up responsible for a lot of idiotic things. The same can't be said for Obama, but he gets the same amount of vitriol.
The criticism of Bush is for his behavior. That's appropriate.
The criticism of Obama is for who he is. That's inappropriate. At least a small percentage of it is because he's black. A large percentage is because he's a Democrat. A large percentage of it is because he's not a Republican. Some percentage of it is just because Beck and Limbaugh and FoxNews continually lead their audiences to believe that their false portrayals of both Republicans and Democrats are accurate.
From a video clip, watch Washington, DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton questioning the head of the Secret Service, Mark Sullivan.
NORTON: Please don't assign to me a number in my question. I just asked you if the threats were up. Are the threats up or not, Mr. Sullivan?
SULLIVAN: They are not. The threats right now in the inappropriate interest that we're seeing is the same level as it has been for the previous two presidents at this point.
Second, Mr. Sheppard ignorantly asks, "What's changed, and why?"... did he happen to miss all the actual violence that took place these past few days? It's not only about the signs that were held up... it's the actions that followed their threats. So that is what has changed... the liberals made threats, but didn't take any action, as they shouldn't, but the far-right wingnuts made their threats and DID act on them. Now, what part of that is hard to understand?
I assume you know who Mary LAndrieu is.
Not quite the same as multiple republican leaders repeatedly validating every single one of the tea partiers' biggest imaginary fears, is it?
here
here
here
Seriously, these random acts of stupidity are the same to you as a well-funded, organized movement that's armed, has called for revolution, has received the encouragement of the GOP, and has one of its leaders asking members to 'reload' and target congressional representatives? (Oh, I know Palin didn't 'mean' to encourage gun violence -- so she says -- but just imagine the firestorm if a left-winger had said this about Republicans. Beck's chalk would have been worn to a nub.)
Are you trying to commit satire here?
You are a hypocrite."
The most threatening behavior that I recall are people being escorted away from his [Bush] path in order that he not see their choice of shirt ware. That's a long way from death threats and cut gas lines.
were people being escorted away from his [Bush] path in order that he not see their choice of shirt wear. That's a long way from death threats and cut gas lines."
Should have previewed first.
you? you are dangerous. probably evil. the right must burn.
Now we have major media sources calling our President a Nazi.
Slight difference there.
BTW, all of the peace groups involved in various protests denounced the violent actions of a few anarchists who broke windows and hurled insults. There were calls from the left for civility at the time; perhaps you were too busy listening to Rush Limbaugh to hear them.
Bush advocated torture; so did the Nazis; Bush ignored the laws against wiretapping, among others; so did the Nazis. Bush invaded a country based on lies; so did the Nazis. Bush incarcerated American citizens (Jose Padilla) without honoring their Constitutional right to due process; the Nazis did the same. The reason he was called a Nazi was due to these and other parallels to Hitler's Regime.
What has Obama done to prove he's a socialist, or a Muslim, or a communist, or any of the other scurrilous terms used by the right these days?
Moreover, Bush was illegally appointed to office by the Supreme Court in 2000, even though he lost the popular vote to Gore and Florida law mandated a statewide recount to determine that state's electoral vote; when progressives objected that this SC decision was unconstitutional, since only Congress is constitutionally charged with settling disputed presidential elections, they were smugly told by conservatives to "Get over it." I recommend the same advice to you now, with the added advantage that Obama was legally elected by a majority of the popular and electoral vote, not appointed by five unelected judges.
Your hypocrisy charge is sheer nonsense; you don't know the difference between dragonfly and a dragon.
That said, I'm sure the grass-roots folks who showed up outside his ranch in Texas had some pretty strong placards. But they were traitors right? Cuz they didn't love President Bush.
I've been attempting to keep up with the threats. At least 38 Democrats - 37 Reps. and 1 Senator - have been threatened this week alone. Some have been sent dog feces, Anthony Weiner was sent white powder. Alan Grayson's young child picked up a ringing phone to hear a death threat.
I fear that by being the loudest, the nutjobs are winning. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution is currently a mess of paranoia, some of it fueled by their political bloggers.
I agree that preventing insurance companies from discriminating against sick people is a merited step.
I also kinda liked the part about insuring 32 million uninsured Americans and reducing the federal deficit by more than $100 billion over next ten years.
Since your important voice in favor of single payer (which you seem to clearly prefer to both the current bill and the old system) was absent when it counted, it all went downhill.
And the healthcare bill that was passed ultimately will be seen as a victory for capitalism, because it protected the capitalist model of providing healthcare for people.
I'm still kind of shocked that any of you wanted this bill passed. The only things of merit this bill does is prevent the insurance companies from discriminating against sick people. That's it. You could have had a simple one page bill that did this and it would've cost the taxpayers the price of ink and paper." --MagCynic
Michael ALSO had a lot more to discuss than the above. I suggest you watch this clip for a better understanding.
Not entirely true, MagCynic; it also provides health care to 32 million people who currently have none and establishes about 8,000 new health clinics across the country. It's by no means everything I wanted but, now that it's passed, like Social Security and Medicare, it can be improved on in the future, and it opens the door to eventually passing single-payer universal care.
And the stimulus/response Republicans would still have voted against it. The fact that there were many things in the bill that they said they wanted and still voted against it en masse proves that.
That's one of my favorites because it so clearly demonstrates the pathology at work. "I didn't want to beat my wife. She made me do it. She knows how much it bothers me when she asks me not to beat her. I had no choice!" If and when right-wingers commit violence, it's because Democrats made them do it by not giving them what they want. Pretty typical actually.
~Adlai Stevenson
---------------------------------------------------------
Great write-up!
Typical liberal media exaggeration. We didn't say it was end of America as we know it -- just the end of American constitutional liberty as we know it.
Get your facts straight.
Signed,
The Teabaggers
TEABAG THIS, IF YOU GOT THE BAGS.
Anyway, you're wrong.
Mark Steyn said this would lead to Armageddon. As in nuclear war.
This was largely republican bill developed by the Heritage Foundation in the 90's in response to the Clinton plan.
The problem is the teabaggers have decided they hate democrats so much they will oppose everything. I hope this hastens the GOP demise because we need a viable second party. Having the Democratic party and a weak, irrational, reactionary, know-nothing GOP will lead to a stronger Democratic party and inevitable corruption and abuse.
Get your facts straight. Your peter has risen to it's level of incompetence.