CNN's Greenfield falsely suggested Media Matters is "extremely angry" at Democrats for not filibustering Alito
SUMMARY: CNN senior analyst Jeff Greenfield falsely suggested that Media Matters for America "ha[s] been extremely angry" at Senate Democrats for being unwilling to pursue a filibuster against Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. In fact, Media Matters is "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media" and has not taken a position on whether Alito should be confirmed or on whether senators should filibuster his nomination.
Appearing on the January 26 edition of The Situation Room, CNN senior analyst Jeff Greenfield falsely suggested that Media Matters for America "ha[s] been extremely angry" at Senate Democrats for being unwilling to pursue a filibuster against Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. In fact, Media Matters is "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media." We have not taken a position on whether Alito should be confirmed or on whether senators should filibuster his nomination.
From Greenfield's exchange with host Wolf Blitzer on the January 26 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: I want to bring in our senior analyst, Jeff Greenfield, who's trying to digest, together with all of us, what's going on. Jeff, it sounds like [Sen. John] Kerry (D-MA), he really wants to position himself right now with the Democratic base, potentially looking ahead to 2008.
GREENFIELD: Yeah, I just unfortunately lost you, Wolf, but if you're asking about the politics of this, if you look at the liberal left blogosphere, at the core activists of the party, on websites like Daily Kos and Media Matters, they have been extremely angry at the apparent unwillingness of the Democratic Party centrists and moderates to engage in all-out filibuster. For them, Alito is a bridge too far. They see him as com -- they believe he's committed to overturning Roe [v. Wade], they see him as part and parcel of the Bush attempt to move the court to the right, and they want an all-out fight. You have had people even who are going to vote against Alito, people on the Judiciary Committee, I believe, like [Sen.] Dianne Feinstein [D-CA], suggesting it's very skeptical, that she's very skeptical about the idea of filibuster. Not to mention the fact that I believe we have three Democratic senators who affirmatively are going to vote for Alito.
But if you want to look at this, and I guess this is almost inevitable, in terms of future presidential politics, I'd have to say that if you're John Kerry, the thing you most want to avoid is being considered as irrelevant to 2008, you know, as somebody who blew the chance to beat George Bush. And I think the idea of rallying the Democratic base behind a fight that they regard as substantively and politically critical, to try to block Judge Alito -- which I don't see how that's going to happen -- if that's how it's analyzed, I think that whether or not John Kerry succeeds in mobilizing the filibuster may be the least relevant part of the conversation. It positions him as the man carrying the banner behind which the core of the Democratic Party would choose to march in terms of trying to stop Sam Alito.
but i wish the demos would filibuster
I believe you Rrastro. It would be great for the GOP if the Democrats fillibuster in almost every way. There was a time when Bill Clinton's political savvy outsmarted the Republicans at every turn. It looks like the parties have switched positions in that regard lately.
John Kerry is now showing us the skill he used to get defeated by one of the worst presidents in history in last election cycle.
Every single member of the U.S. Senate has One Vote, and every single member of that body can cast that One Vote however they see fit, and may certainly Vote their Conscience if they wish, there being nothing at all that can legally compel a Senator from Voting his or her own Conscience.
If 41 Senators collectively, have reservations enough as to the nominee's ascension to the Supreme Judicial Court of these United States; reservations enough to cast their Votes against closing debate (cloture), then they should do that.
Every single Senator should cast his or her Vote according to their own Conscience, there being nothing to prevent them from doing so, ever.
Not threat or penalty or anything.
The Republicans can and will invoke the "Nukular Option" as they say in Texas. Then where will you be?
The Democrats are going to lose this battle. They lost it 2 Novembers ago, but they don't seem to realize it.
I want the Democrats to succeed, but this is the wrong way. I wish you could see that.
...if MMFA is angry or not, but I certainly am.
The likelihood of a filibuster is small, the likelihood of a successful one smaller still. But some things you do because they are the right thing to do. You do them even if you expect to fail, even if you know you'll fail, you do them if only to prove that there are some things you will go to the mat for. So filibuster!
Oh, and one last thing: I don't want to hear any nonsense about "fairness" or "up or down votes" or "qualifications." GOPpers, the people who made "political litmus test" a household phrase, are in no position to lecture anyone on any of those topics.
He was projecting just a bit, but what the hell, the free press isn't so bad, right?
I would like a filibuster on some level as well, but it is not worth it. In the end, the Democrats will be patronizingly protecting the voters from themselves, giving the Republicans a campaign platform and making it much more difficult to get Democratic nominations done in the future. It's not worth that. Elections have consequences and this protection by the Democrats is insulating the public from experiencing the downside.
Give the people what they want even if it is the wrong thing. The people get it right. The problem is it usually takes them a while to come around. Be patient and forget the fillibuster.
The GOP won't have the congress forever.
If the Democrats fillibuster, the Republicans definitely will fillibuster Democratic nominees when they are back in the minority and there is a Democratic President.
I have a feeling that if the Democrats fillibuster, they will prolong the Republican majority in congress as well.
I pray to God that there is no fillibuster. It would be the most foolish thing to do.
they will now have two fresh young super-conservatives on SCOTUS to join with super-conservatives Scalia and Thomas. Combine them with the conservative Kennedy and you have a consistent majority for the next 25 or so years. Keep in mind that Stevens is extremely old as well, if he were to expire in the next couple of years the coservative majority becomes 6-3. This legacy will live on even after chimpy leaves office.
GREENFIELD: "...if you look at...Media Matters, they have been extremely angry at the apparent unwillingness of the Democratic Party centrists and moderates to engage in all-out filibuster"
I bet I know more about the content of the items that Media Matters for America publishes than does Jeff Greenfield; I bet I've read more items than him, and commented on more items than him (if he does that at all); and I bet I've known about MMFA longer than him, or at least as long, as I've known about this site from the week it went up, and only it's founders could have known about it much longer than that.
I bet I'm a better judge of what MMFA does than Jeff Greenfield.
And if MMFA is in any way 'angry' at the Democratic Party, for anything at all, I'm unaware of it.
And if MMFA has in any way supported Senate Democrats to 'engage in all-out filibuster', I'm unaware of that also.
What would make me so able to spot these things on the part of MMFA, had they been there?
Because not only am I sometimes 'annoyed' and 'irritated' (but never 'extremely angry') with my Democratic Brothers and Sisters, in the matter of asserting themselves on behalf of the People of the United States of America, but I have also been 'angry' (but not 'extremely') at what I have perceived as a reluctance of Senate Democrats to stand on their minority rights, and to stand on Senate Rule 22; and I have posted many a comment expressing such a sentiment as that ('angry' comments even)...
...and not only have I never considered MMFA to share these my sentiments, but I have often found them to have removed my comments ('angry' or not) from this forum; comments calling for the Senate to stand on their minority rights, and to stand on Senate Rule 22 (and most notably, my many comments identifying the so-called 'nuclear option' as nothing but a threat to break that Senate Rule 22); and as a result of the removal of those many posts (and many others), rather than feel that MMFA shared those sentiments with me, I have sometimes been 'annoyed' and 'irritated' (but never 'extremely angry') with MMFA...
...as I would be with any other of my Brothers and Sisters in the matter of asserting themselves on behalf of the People of the United States of America...
...of whom I count myself one.
And so Jeff Greenfield's mischaracterization of MMFA is spotted immediately by me as being ridiculous; because it's more a characterization of me and my sentiments; sentiments I have never felt that MMFA shared with me...
not once.
or it would risk it's tax exempt position. However, the tenor of the majority of the posters on subjects related to Alioto (Kennedy's word) appears to be pro-filibuster. It appears the likelyhood of a filibuster is getting slimmer by the day, perhaps the D's should have pushed for an earlier vote, before certain Senators started declaring their support for his confirmation.
Is not responsible for nor can they be defined by those who choose to post on its site.
Maybe Greenfield just read some of the posts here and calls them MMFA. That would be a pretty stupid mistake.
The other possibility is that he has confused MMFA with some other website. Either way, Greenfield is absolutely wrong about this.
I think you're right. He characterized it as the "blogosphere" in an attempt to collude reader posts with what MMFA actually is writing.
There is a lot of preaching from the choir that goes on here, but in all fairness, MMFA genuinely does present unbiased, factual reporting on right-wing misinformation.
Posters from here should go infiltrate more of the right-wing spin sites and refute the lies they echo through the blogosphere.
Media Matters is a terrific forum for people who pay attention to more than the latest Holloywwod goosip or who won Idol. We pay attention to the crap this White House does and we are vocal about. Then again, because we pay attention, we realize that Alito and Bush are, and will continue to, make a shambles of our Constitution! Media Matters may or may not be "extremely angry" at the lack of spine inherent in the Dem's but I am! What happened to the Repub's concern for the rule of law!
Probably dreamed it up last night and thought it still sounded good when he woke up this morning. Other than that I can't imagine this site would state an opinion on this. I can and I hope they filibuster this guy.
Media Matters,
You began your response to the Crap News Network's piece with "In fact..."
Much too mild.
To get your response noticed by the cable news bloviatosphere (and to conform with Greenfield's distortions), you should have begun your response with a string of profanity, mixed with ethnic slurs and sexual preference innuendo.
After all, facts seem to get very little airtime these days.
You are absolutely right, Drafted.
I can't believe how stupid "news" shows have become. It is all opinion and entertainment and no facts. No wonder the GOP wins so much. Cable news is breads and circuses.
Awesome neologism! High five!
It's time for the Democrats to show some backbone, but I doubt many of them will take the risk. Kerry's moving in the right direction, but he's always been way too cautious. His own party thinks he's irrelevant these days, so what does he have to lose now? If he thinks he's the man, he needs to start acting like it! No matter what happens, it will make the public realize that the Democratic Party will actually stand up for what they believe.
Greenfield and all these other boneheads are gonna be pretty shocked in November when (I pray!) the Dems take back the House or the Senate...who's ass will they be kissing then?
It is a stretch to think the sharpest people at these networks can't tell the difference between the posters opinion from the MMFA staff positions. I betcha Greenfield makes a ton. I can comprehend better than him? Is it corruption? sad.
On a brighter note, as bad as the democrats did questioning Alito they have rightfully landed on a legitimate concern. Executive power is huge. The party line vote out of commitee should spur serious discussions about where the republic is headed. Lets hope for all Americans there is some integrity left somewhere.
Not here. They are not worth getting angry over. Support independents!
Listen to his commentary - it's meaningless.
He talks about what Kos and MMFA have to say, gets it wrong, and then just purely conjectures about Kerry's motives.
No original reporting, no real analysis, nothing compelling - just treading water, filling airtime.
THIS is why CNN has been losing viewers. They used to be a NEWS network - now they just put people on who speculate idly and make stuff up as it suits them.
I guess it's cheaper than actually doing some reporting...
Good analysis. Greenfield "treading water" is a bizarre thing to behold. He says, virtually, nothing at all. Unlike President Bush, he doesn't revert to basic talking points, he just rambles, at least in this segment, in a weird "flow of consciousness" response that adds neither heat nor light.
MMFA takes no political stand, and this is important to note. Greenfield identifies MMFA as one of two "core activists", which is good PR for MMFA, but shows ignorance of what MMFA is actually DOING.
MMFA has no "ACTION" issue with Alito. But, if you include POSTERS as part of the site, which reflect the "core activist" positions, then it's fair to say that filibustering Alito is a major goal ... it is for ME, for example, and I've posted as much many times.
The really important SPIN we've seen in the last couple of weeks is the overwhelming MEDIA REPORTING that Alito's performance made a filibuster IMPOSSIBLE. This "analysis" was clearly WRONG, but it reflected the desire and wish of the Rightwing, that Alito be confirmed without trouble.
The MEDIA are daily engaged with doing whatever supports this Administration. If a poll is good, or improving, they report it (as GOOD news). Since Bush's polls are consistently DOWN lately, if they are mentioned at all, they are depicted as evidence that Bush "does not govern by polls", which is portrayed as an ATTRIBUTE, and something to be PROUD of. The "win-win" spin on polls, if a partisan for the administration.
A filibuster is in the works for Alito, thank GOD. The Media got it WRONG. Now, the spin is that a filibuster cannot succeed, and those attempting it will be damaged politically. Once the filibuster succeeds, the spin will be ratcheted up to claims that this filibuster will DOOM the Dems in the '06 elections.
As the MEDIA's predictions fall, one by one, will the public eventually realize that they are being fed talking points from the RNC, and that the "reporting" has no bearing on REALITY?
THIS is what MMFA does so well: Keeps a record of the Media's complicity with the NeoCon regime, and by so doing, document how the Media weaves a complex web of perceptions, spins, and distortions which ultimately destroy THEIR OWN credibility.
You predict every step very well. That is why you are a great poster.
The problem is that the Republicans will be successful. I don't want them to be, but they will be. The Republicans can use this as a way to go into attack mode, when they have been on the defense for so long.
The Democrats need offense. A fillibuster is defense for them.
The Republicans will use a fillibuster as a pretense for getting 60 senators, when if Dems just vote "no" and avoid the fillibuster, the people will learn to miss Sandra Day O'Connor's wisdom.
A fillibuster is superceding the will of the people here. However much you and I hate it, it is what the people have asked for here. They need to taste that bitter fruit in order to learn the lesson.
It is the worst possible strategy to pull a fillibuster at this juncture. The slate will be wiped clean and the Republicans will have another head-start on the next election cycle.
This is just another way for CNN to try'n discredit web sites like media matters. Their internet reporters routinely direct viewers to websites that slam their targets but they never cover the stories about CNN on MM. They feel threatened because the more people read MM the more they will turn away from corporate/cable news. I wonder if wolf feels used? Paul Bremner admitted to wolf he repeatley spun mis information about Iraq in all his interviews with CNN while serving bush in Iraq. The people that run the situation room can't possible think viewers will believe the comments coming from the blitzters and greenfield's considering they appear to be a bunch of suckers who can't investigate and report the news. Anyone ever notice CNN bobbleheads stopped using the term "up and down vote" after the far right forced Myers out?
LIKE I SAID MMFA KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. THE HEAT IS GETTING TO CNN JUST LIKE IT IS GETTING TO FOX NEWS, WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE IS HURTING THEM THEY HAVE TO PUT OUT THE LIES ABOUT THAT PERSON OR WEB SITE. AND SINCE CNN IS ON MEDIA MATTTER ALOT FOR TELLING LIES LIKE FOX NEWS AND MSNBC THEY ARE RUNNING SCARED. IF THEY HAD THE BALLS LIKE KEITH ON MSNBC TO TELL THE TURTH ABOUT THIS WHITEHOUSE AND SOME IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR A WEB SITE LIKE MEDIA MATTER. I DON'T WATCH CABLE OR REGULAR NATIONAL NEWS ANYMORE, BECAUSE ALL YOU SEE IS PRO REPUBLICAN EVEN WHEN THEY DO WRONG. AND WHEN I DO WATCH IT, IT IS TO SEE HOW THEY ARE GOING TO TREAT A PERSON WHO IS NOT A RIGHT-WING OR IF THE DEMORCRATS SAYING SOMETHING LIKE PLANTATION, I WILL WATCH TO SEE HOW VERY HARD THEY WOULD BE ON THAT PERSON.
MMFA doesn't get "angry" at politicians. It gets "angry" when media commentators like yourself do nothing but waste time and make the public stupider.
Getting angry at politicians is more of a dKos thing.
if you look at the liberal left blogosphere, at the core activists of the party, on websites like Daily Kos and Media Matters, they have been extremely angry at the apparent unwillingness of the Democratic Party centrists and moderates to engage in all-out filibuster. For them, Alito is a bridge too far.
I.e., you crazy posters.
He is absolutely correct.
Thanks!
[I]f you look at the liberal left blogosphere, at the core activists of the party, on websites like Daily Kos and Media Matters, they have been extremely angry at the apparent unwillingness of the Democratic Party centrists and moderates to engage in all-out filibuster. For them, Alito is a bridge too far.
Not quite, Beans. There are two problems.
First, the posters here are not the core activists of the party. Not even the biggest ego on board could claim that. We're delighted to have a voice, but we realize the limit of our influence. Hence, Greenfield was clearly identifying MMFA itself as a "core activist."
And second, the posters have not been "extremely angry at the apparent unwillingness of the Democratic Party centrists and moderates to engage in all-out filibuster." Some are upset, some are annoyed, some frankly don't care, and some don't want a filibuster at all. I don't see "extreme anger" on the issue.
Summing up: Greenfield was wrong, MMFA was right, and you are simply mistaken. But do feel free to try again. There's promise in your writing, at least if you can turn off the bold print.
End Bold
at the core activists of the party, on websites like Daily Kos and Media Matters
1. The Kos does call for filbuster, daily.
Please go the link on Senator Kerry's web site and sign his petition. It is clear that without a last push, Alito is going to be confirmed, placing the third branch of government in the dominion and control of a political sect that will support the continued movement of President Bush to centralize the power of the Presidency to the extreme. This is happening despite the fact that all of the polls reflect disapproval of the direction the President is taking the country with issues relating to prisons, torture, felonious wiretapping by federal officers, violation of international treaties, immigration policy, preservation of the environment, global warming, and on and on - disapproval that has been generated notwithstanding the onslaught of misinformation appearing on CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, Washington Post, and, of course, FOX.
Yesterday, our government joined with Iran - part of the "axis of evil" - to prevent the United Nations from including as one of the over 3,000 organizations that are allowed to give "consultative advice" to the United Nations, any gay or lesbian organization seeking to protect human rights of gay and lesbian people from such policies as Iran's death penalty for sodomy. See [link to hrw.org]
The elements in control of the Republican Party are simply not historical Republicans. They are not moderates; they are not even strong conservatives with regard to individual liberty or monetary policy. That is why so many have broken ranks from the administration and why so many are finally showing contrary beliefs in polls unsupportive of administration policies.
As Molly Ivans recently wrote, it is only the legislature - both Democrats and Republicans - who seem to be afraid to do what the American Public wants to see done on all of these critical issues. Judge Alito will do all he can to promote his own activist agenda in support of this controlling radical element.
This centralization of power was exactly what the fathers of our country worked so feverishly to prevent when they wrote the Constitution. It is dangerous even when one considers the present substantial possibility, if not likelihood, that a different party will be in control of at least one of the branches next time. That possibility is still three years away, and the precedent should not be in place for either party to do what has not been done in 200 years. No single party should have complete dominion over the affairs of our government, and already, 7 of 9 Supreme Court justices are appointees of Republican Presidents; the Senate is controlled by Republicans; the House is controlled by Republicans; the President is Republican; and, the majorities in the legislature are so steep that it is not even possible to sustain a filibuster opposing a bad law or appointment without Republican support.
Even absent his own questionable credibility, Judge Alito's stance on a unitary executive is a frightening prospect in the face of a president that is making clear his intention to ignore the will of the people and the laws he has sworn to uphold - laws that were signed by Presidents without veto under the skewered interpretation of a handful of right wing lawyers. Please preserve the checks and balances so desperately necessary for the protection of the Republic!
Here is the link to sign the petition:
[link to www.johnkerry.com]
I totally agree even with the risk of political suicide for the Dems. The Congress needs to stand up and preserve the Constitutional checks and balances that are supposed to be the essence of our Democratic Republic. I still don't see any outrage at the idea of Presidential "signing statements" being used by Bush to bypass the Congressional intent of the bill, as in the McCain anti-torture bill. Presidential "signing statements" were traditionally used to note and congratulate the particular members of Congress who brought the bill into being, but Bush is taking the "signing statement" to a new level by ignoring the legislative process and purpose and interpreting the law as he sees fit. Since Alito is known to be a strong supporter of the "Unitary Executive" would he not be likely to uphold such unilateral powers asserted by the Executive branch? To confirm Alito is to give the President a Constitutional blank check and the potential to make the legislative body impotent.
Perhaps the filibuster would hurt the Dems politically but I think it is the right thing to do, a worthy fight to keep our government Constitutionally balanced.
if media matters isn't angry, they should be. i am. this is the democrats alamo. make your stand, if you get your butts kicked, so be it. you showed us some statesmanship. i'll stay with y'all. cave under at this point in time, and i'm otta here.
senator durbin - crack that whip.
I JUST SIGNED THE PETITION AND THANKS FOR TELLING US ABOUT IT.
underestimate the grave, real THREAT to ALL that Alito represents. Advocating non-action to get people to wake up is tanamount to surrender. We CANNOT WAIT for people to wake up, it'll be TOO LATE FOR US ALL.
FILIBUSTER ALITO NOW!