CNN ignored evidence of GOP obstructionism, allowed McConnell to attack Dems
On the July 23 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, CNN congressional correspondent Dana Bash referred to the "narrative that we've heard more and more from the Republicans here, which is that they say the Democratic Congress simply isn't getting anything done." Bash then showed a video clip of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) asserting that "the American people are looking at this Congress and saying, 'Where's the legislation? What are you going to do to make America better?' " But in airing the GOP claim that the Democratic leadership "isn't getting anything done" -- which Bash did not challenge -- she ignored the Republicans' record of blocking legislation proposed by the Democratic majority in the Senate. Indeed, as McClatchy Newspapers reported on July 20: "This year Senate Republicans are threatening filibusters to block more legislation than ever before."
From the McClatchy article:
Seven months into the current two-year term, the Senate has held 42 "cloture" votes aimed at shutting off extended debate -- filibusters, or sometimes only the threat of one -- and moving to up-or-down votes on contested legislation. Under Senate rules that protect a minority's right to debate, these votes require a 60-vote supermajority in the 100-member Senate.
Democrats have trouble mustering 60 votes; they've fallen short 22 times so far this year. That's largely why they haven't been able to deliver on their campaign promises.
By sinking a cloture vote this week, Republicans successfully blocked a Democratic bid to withdraw combat troops from Iraq by April, even though a 52-49 [sic] Senate majority voted to end debate.
This year Republicans also have blocked votes on immigration legislation, a no-confidence resolution for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and major legislation dealing with energy, labor rights and prescription drugs.
Nearly 1 in 6 roll-call votes in the Senate this year have been cloture votes. If this pace of blocking legislation continues, this 110th Congress will be on track to roughly triple the previous record number of cloture votes - 58 each in the two Congresses from 1999-2002, according to the Senate Historical Office.
The McClatchy article was accompanied by a graphic comparing the projected number of Senate cloture votes for the current congressional term with previous terms:
Further, as Media Matters for America noted, an April 18 Roll Call article (subscription required) quoted Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-MS) acknowledging the GOP's strategy. He said, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail ... For [former Senate Democratic Leader Tom] Daschle (S.D.), it failed. For [then-Senate Minority Leader Harry] Reid [D-NV], it succeeded, and so far it's working for us."
The McConnell clip that aired during Bash's report came from his July 22 appearance on CNN's Late Edition. During that interview, McConnell further asserted that the Democratic Congress has conducted only "Iraq votes and investigations. On the legislative side, about all we've been able to accomplish is to keep the lights on in the Capitol, 19 or 20 post office renamings, and we have passed a very important troop funding bill, thank goodness." Host Wolf Blitzer did not challenge McConnell with the record pace of cloture votes and the GOP leadership's stated "strategy of being obstructionist."
Later on the July 23 Situation Room, Blitzer interviewed Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) about his upcoming resolution to censure President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. During the interview, Blitzer uncritically repeated McConnell's assertion that the Democratic Congress was not producing legislation and asked Feingold to respond:
BLITZER: When I spoke yesterday with the Republican leader, the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, in the Senate, he said it's precisely these kinds of what he would characterize as "stunts," political stunts, whether an all-night debate involving Iraq or motion of censure, which is why the approval number, the job approval number for the Congress is even lower than it is for the president of the United States. Instead of focusing in on substantive, he says, issues, you're focusing in on political theater. What would you say to McConnell?
From the July 22 edition of CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer
BLITZER: Before we get to the specifics of that debate, I want your quick reaction to what Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said earlier today on Meet the Press, recommending censure of the president. Listen to this.
FEINGOLD [video clip]: I think we need to do something serious in terms of accountability. And that's why I will be surely introducing a censure resolution of the president and the administration.
One, on their getting us onto the war of Iraq -- in Iraq and their failure to adequately prepare our military, and the misleading statements that have continued throughout the war in Iraq. And a second, on this administration's outrageous attack on the rule of law.
BLITZER: All right, do you want to respond to Senator Feingold?
McCONNELL: Yeah. You know, today marks the 200th day of the new Congress. And the kind of stunt that Senator Feingold just recommended, on the heels of the all-night theater of Tuesday night, gives you a sense, Wolf, of why this Congress now has a 14 percent approval rating. We think it's the lowest in the history of polling.
All they do is have Iraq votes and investigations. On the legislative side, about all we've been able to accomplish is to keep the lights on in the Capitol, 19 or 20 post office renamings, and we have passed a very important troop funding bill, thank goodness.
But the American people are looking at this Congress and saying, where's the legislation? What are you going to do to make America better? I think Senator Feingold's suggestions are right in league with the all-night session the other night, which the American people are looking at with disbelief.
BLITZER: Here's what the specifics of his charges -- and I'll briefly go through them. Among other things, for the incorrect information on Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, incorrect information about any Al Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein, failure to plan for a civil conflict in Iraq, overstretching of the Army and the Marine Corps, justifying military involvement in Iraq by repeatedly distorting the situation in Iraq.
From the July 23 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BASH: And now, it is important to note that it was just about a year and a half ago that Senator Feingold first pushed this idea of censuring the president. And back then, Wolf, Democratic senators could not run far or fast enough from this idea, or even answering questions about it. And although the leadership is making clear they're not going to bring it up for a vote now, that is not the case anymore. They are, as you just heard, much more complimentary of this idea that Senator Feingold is proposing.
BLITZER: And how are the Republicans reacting to all of this, Dana?
BASH: Well, they're not -- they're certainly trying to jump on this and really seize on what Senator Feingold is saying and try to weave it into a narrative that we've heard more and more from the Republicans here, which is that they say the Democratic Congress simply isn't getting anything done. And they point out over and over, Wolf, that the Democratic Congress' approval ratings are even lower than President Bush.
And, in fact, I want our viewers to take a listen to what the Senate Republican leader told you on Late Edition yesterday. Take a listen.
McCONNELL [video clip]: The American people are looking at this Congress and saying, where's the legislation? What are you going to do to make America better? I think Senator Feingold's suggestions are right in league with the all-night session the other night, which the American people are looking at with disbelief.
BASH: So, as you just heard, Republicans are grabbing on to this, saying that this is part of the frustration the American people have with the Democratic Congress. And that, Wolf, is one of the reasons why the Democratic leadership at this time is saying that they are not going to bring this particular measure for a vote on the Senate floor.
BLITZER: All right, Dana. Thank you very much.
[...]
BLITZER: When I spoke yesterday with the Republican leader, the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, in the Senate, he said it's precisely these kinds of what he would characterize as "stunts," political stunts, whether an all-night debate involving Iraq or motion of censure, which is why the approval number, the job approval number for the Congress is even lower than it is for the president of the United States. Instead of focusing in on substantive, he says, issues, you're focusing in on political theater. What would you say to McConnell?
FEINGOLD: The only stunt that's going on here is by Republicans in the Senate who have continued to fabricate excuses for this Iraq war, year after year. They have been enablers of this tragedy. They have not shown the guts to stand up, in most cases, and vote to end this war. They will use every excuse, every slogan, every political trick to not let us end this war. So I would call that the stunt. And that's the stunt that's killing Americans, not what I'm talking about.
BLITZER: One final question. I want you to respond to your old friend Senator [John] McCain [R-AZ], who strongly disagrees with you when it comes to Iraq. But a lot of our viewers out there remember McCain-Feingold, the campaign finance reform law that the two of you worked so closely on.
The reason congress has a low approval rating is because they aren't impeaching Bush,Cheney and Gonzales. They haven't ended the Iraq war. They are still playing politics instead of doing what they were sent there to do., honor their oath and protect the Constitution.
that is true and it is also the responsibility of the citizens to do the same, get informed, not trust FOX News Mismanagent Company, and vote the bums out of office.
You got that right Wolfie.
you need 67 votes to convict bush. that will not happen. you need a veto proof majority of 67 to "end the war". that will not happen under the present conditions. bush will simply veto any withdrawal, and he will portray any cutoff in funds as undermining the troops. and a good percentage of the public will buy it. what has to happen is that a certain number of republicans start feeling the heat. the democrats taking control in congress was a good thing, if only for one reason. they are able to hold hearings that at least bring some accountability to this adminsitration. you can say vote everyone out, but that brings the possibility of a republican dominated congress again. not a very good option.
Out of context alert!
This was all part of a discussion on censuring the President which led into Bash's report - where she then said the Republicans are using this to continue to say the Dems are getting very little accomplished. Immediately followed by Russ Feingold's reaction. Another red herring misinformation meatless entity.
"But in airing the GOP claim that the Democratic leadership "isn't getting anything done" -- which Bash did not challenge -- she ignored the Republicans' record of blocking legislation proposed by the Democratic majority in the Senate."
This is the beef Tommy. The lack of reporting the obvious, that the Republicans are obstructing every vote.
Bash was asked for the Republican's reaction and she gave it. It isn't her job to comment on it from an editorial standpoint. That is why Blitzer went immediately to Feingold.
Are reporters not supposed to air the Republican's response to anything if it is unfavorable to Democrats? It's called reporting accurately what they said, followed by opponent's reaction. Fair, balanced, reasonable, and informative.
I disagree. Your philosophy of journalism allows people like McConnell to say something flatly false. Them going to Feingold is nice but ultimately if someone is prone to believe McConnell they won't believe Feingold's rebuttal. Journalists have a responsibility to correct falsehoods perpetuated by politicians. She or Wolf should have rebutted his claims immediately. This "fair and balanced" regurgitation is not reporting.
Specific, verifiable innaccuracies, I would agree with you. But this is just typical political manuevering and spin from a Republican Congressman on a blanket "they are getting anything done" statement. The best rebuttal to that is allowing an opposing Congressman to offer up his opinion. What should Bash do, a laundry list of accomplishments of the Dems from their own spinmeisters?
As long as there is equal time from each side, as there is apparently is here, then I am OK with it.
But, we disagree.
It would appear so. I would just like to see journalists who honor truth and question political rhetoric.
I share your concerns, don't get me wrong. But to cover politics and leave out political rhetoric would be a constant "fact check" and even that would have to be fact checked, and it would never end - particularly if it was covering subjective opinions.
Which is why the best hope is that the people from both sides are given equal time and are well versed and able to state their side clearly and rebut their opponent's spin, and then we are obliged to judge it for ouselves.
Tommy,
Here's a little "fact check" info:
In the last three sessions of the senate...cloture votes have failed to produce an up or down vote...called obstructionism by some...40 times.
Democrats blocked an up or down vote 15 times.
Republicans blocked an up or down vote 16 times.
A bi-partisan effort blocked an up or down vote 9 times.
While I'm waiting on my final audit from Ernst and Young...the record is available for all to see at the library of congress.
mmfa has done a good job of pandering to their base by...in their favorite terms...uncritically reporting or failing to report...the whole story.
Politics as usual...mmfa is no different than many of the people that they disparage for their reporting styles or ethics.
Wes,
Do you think you could be so helpful to provide support for your analysis so I can see it for myself?
Thanks.
Sure...as I said earlier...it's all in the library of congress...but it requires a little work.
Google up library of congress...roll up your sleeves and have fun...you're welcome.
Bing -Yes, exactly! You've just nailed the whole 'Fair and Balanced' trick right on the head. It's when the media shows two sides of an argument. One of the sides is blatantly lying. They go to someone on the other side to make a rebuttal and then let the whole thing sit there as if the two sides are 'balanced.' Of course they're not and if reporters would do their jobs and report the facts surrounding the arguments, the liars would be exposed. Fox 'news' has no trouble banging the drum if a Democrat is caught in a lie. If a Republican lies they (occasionally) allow someone from across the aisle to call them on it. But then they just report it as a partisan argument. "We're not taking sides here folks." But not exposing a blatant lie is taking sides. This whole pose of being neutral is far more dishonest than the old days where the editorial bias of most outlets was openly accepted.
'Old days' as in newspaper days.
"Bash was asked for the Republican's reaction and she gave it. It isn't her job to comment on it from an editorial standpoint. That is why Blitzer went immediately to Feingold."--tommy
Maybe that is a difference in philosophy. I think reporters should be more than just stenographers. A reporter should be able to call BS when it is as obvious as this.
You and others are ignoring her stated "weave it into the narrative". That is a very important editorializing comment from Bash that you approve of, obviously, and isn't on your BS radar.
If you think that is furthering some Republican bias on her part, well, it's just the opposite.
You seem to believe those few words are just as effective as mentioning the real reasons nothing is getting done. We disagree.
Saying somebody is "weaving a narrative" is not the same as calling the story "false" or even calling it into question. It is merely pointing out that it is a part of the Republican strategy. I regard such remarks as fairly neutral considering the Republican "narrative" in question is completely disingenuous considering the relevant facts of the situation.
Those words are preemptively casting doubt on what the Republicans are saying, so the viewer is fully aware of their intent and motivation as this reporter sees it, fairly, in my opinion.
I don't see that at all. There are much more clearer ways to "cast doubt" than that. The situation warranted it and the reporter failed to note it.
And she also said "weave it into a narrative". That is hardly an endorsement of what she was accurately reporting.
I didn't say she was endorsing anything. The issue is the lack of reporting.
"Weaving into a narrative" is easily translated into "their own spin", which is accurate indeed. It leaves the viewer knowing that this isn't some fact, but rather typical political spin and should be weighed in that context.
People don't need to be spoon fed that, anybody watching this program is well aware of it, undoubtedly.
Call me old fashioned but I would have preferred a fact based rebuttal versus a literary critique. I'd much preferred Bash to say something like, "but it's the Republicans in congress that are threatening to filibuster much of the legislation proposed by the Democrats."
They need 60% and the american people haven't voted in 60% yet.
Excuses, excuses, excuses. They can whine that they don't have the votes over and over again but the real truth is they REFUSE to even TRY! Can't make AIPAC mad, you know.
You're exactly right. The American people voted for a change in Iraq policy, which the Democrats have been too weak-kneed and timid to follow through. It's no wonder the public looks at them with the same low poll numbers as Bush.
Tommy,
Why are you blaming the lack of anything getting done on the Dems?Did you even read the McClatchy article? Did you even read the MMFA article? And here you are spewing the Republican talking point.
Compare this statement from the MMFA article:
Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-MS) acknowledging the GOP's strategy. He said, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail
to this from the McClatchy article:
Even Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., who's served in Congress since 1973, complained that "the Senate is spiraling into the ground to a degree that I have never seen before, and I've been here a long time. All modicum of courtesy is going out the window."
In the above Lott is admitting the GOP's obstructionist strategy is failing.
Even McCain is not happy with the GOP strategy. Note his comment from the McClatchy article:
"You can't say that all we're going to do around here in the United States Senate is have us govern by 51 votes — otherwise we might as well be unicameral, because then we would have the Senate and the House exactly the same," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Also compare the above Republican statements to the McClathcy graph.
And I thought you were above cheap shots tommy.
If you could possibly make your points without mischaracterizing mine, I would be shocked.
So, please tell me where I personally blamed not getting anything done on the Democrats?
Seems to me you are the one wallowing in your own talking points, and with no accuracy to boot.
Seems to me you blame the Dems right here:
You're exactly right. The American people voted for a change in Iraq policy, which the Democrats have been too weak-kneed and timid to follow through. It's no wonder the public looks at them with the same low poll numbers as Bush.
tommy / Tuesday July 24, 2007 03:15:21 PM EST
Please expalin.
I specifically said Iraq, not anything. This discussion and context of Harlequin's post to me is discussing the McClatchey article, referencing many other agenda items.......which I did not opine on.
I specifically said Iraq, not anything. This discussion and context of Harlequin's post to me is discussing the McClatchey article, referencing many other agenda items.......which I did not opine on. - tommy / Tuesday July 24, 2007 04:20:46 PM EST
Did you even read the MMFA article?
Senator McConnell was being specific too. Take a read at this:
The McConnell clip that aired during Bash's report came from his July 22 appearance on CNN's Late Edition. During that interview, McConnell further asserted that the Democratic Congress has conducted only "Iraq votes and investigations. On the legislative side, about all we've been able to accomplish is to keep the lights on in the Capitol, 19 or 20 post office renamings, and we have passed a very important troop funding bill, thank goodness."
Did you see where I put in bold the words, only "Iraq votes"? Wouldn't you say that's specific? Just like your talking point.
Did you read what followed McConnell's comment? Here take a read at what followed:
Host Wolf Blitzer did not challenge McConnell with the record pace of cloture votes and the GOP leadership's stated "strategy of being obstructionist." - from MMFA article.
In response to your post I was pointing out the Republican "strategy of being obstructionist" that you failed to mention when you put the blame on the Democratic Party.
Your "Iraq votes" wasn't even mentioned in your original post, not to mention being bold type which you just now did too, and you were referencing Trent Lott.....so I am not sure what you are even trying to say, but frankly, I could care less.
Maybe you're just a little sensitive where your precious Democrats are concerned? And I could care less if that's the case either.
"the Democrats have been too weak-kneed and timid to follow through. "
'nuff said.
I can't wait to see how you spin it.
Read the post I was responding too.......can't wait for your apology/retraction.
No need to apologize or retract when I was right.
"Even McCain is not happy with the GOP strategy."
To the contrary, McCain's statement, at least in the context of the article, is defending the filibuster threats, highlighting rules differences between the House and Senate. If he truly believed that the GOP should be compromising to reach supermajorities, one would assume that he would be part of compromises, which he is not.
I have to agree with that. If y'all watched the youtube debate, one of the greatest questions ever asked was by a war mom who literally said "when are y'all going to grow a spine and follow through with your calls for withdrawl?". Great question.
Being in Kentucky, I am ashamed of our repeated endorsement of Mitch McConnell, whom I feel to be the most effective capitol hill insider of our times, a true Cardinal de Richelieu for backroom strongarming, the staunchest adherent to the neoconservative assault on civil liberties, the breakdown of middle class support systems, and the most fervid believer in the consolidation of power in the fewest hands possible at the expense of our nation's wellbeing. I truly believe that he cound't care less about the dying soldiers in Iraq or ever passing legislation to benefit our country if there is still work to be done to empower the conservatives.
The Republicans are doing the exact same thing the Democrats did when they were in the minority. It cuts both ways. Obstructionism leads to gridlock and Congress being unable to get anything done. The American people end up disaproving of the job that Congress is doing. The strategy has worked well for both sides.
RH,
They may be using the same technique, but they are on pace to use it 3 times more than any Congress in history!
The article also ignored the fact that some of the filibusters were bipartisan. The filibuster of the immigration bill was certainly bipartisan, but the article stated that it was a partisan Republican filibuster. That simply isn't true. There was bipartisan support for that bill and bipartisan opposition to it.
Ok, that is one of 48.
Excuse my typo, 1 of 42.
If you look up at the big chart dominating the article, you will see that your post is disingenuous. The repubs are not doing "the exact same thing" as the dems, they are doing 300% more than the dems or any other previous congressional minority has done in American history.
It's hard to defend a talking point or get anyone to believe it when there is glaring visual evidence that it is total BS.
The Democrats have also tried to rush legislation through at a much faster pace than the Republicans did. In the immigration bill, for example, Reid tried to push the bill through with no hearings on it and no reports on the costs of the legislation. The Republicans were more deliberate on their legislation and went through the correct process to try to get legislation passed. They didn't try to just ram it through the way that Reid has.
So, you are seriously saying that this "pushing through" by Reid necessitated the normal amount of filibustering usually used in a full term??? I can't imagine what you would be saying if the Dems were doing this! Where is the documentation, other than the immigration bill, for your basis here?
I don't have any documentation. It's just an observation that I've made. From what I've seen, the Democratic leadership in the Senate has been even less willing to let Republicans add amendments to bills than the Republican leaders were when they were in the majority.
Also, the Democrats did the same thing when they first brought up the minimum wage bill. They insisted that they had to have a clean bill, and they refused to let Republicans add any amendments to it at first. The Republicans then filibustered the bill because they weren't allowed to add amendments to it. They wanted to add amendments that would ease the burden on small businesses, and they filibustered that particular bill only because the Democrats wouldn't allow them to add amendments to the bill.
The correct process? You mean like that illegally extended vote where cheney et al strong armed republicans who had already voted to change their vote?
At least they didn't have an all nighter in which they tried to get their colleagues to vote for a bill by making them tired.
RH,
I think you have your partisan blinders on here (its not like most of us don't), but how many hours of CSPAN have you watched to base your observations on?
The point is, the Republicans can't say the Dems aren't doing anything, but then block them at a record rate. That is simply not genuine.
Clearly you were in a coma or out of the country between 2003 and 2006. The repub majority bent every rule imaginable to stifle both debate and amendments from the minority. That has been so thouroughly documented that your opinion as stated above must either originate from a gross ignorance of recent political history, or from the blind core of party loyalism. Either way, it is a pathetically inaccurate position.
The Republicans are doing the exact same thing the Democrats did when they were in the minority. It cuts both ways. Obstructionism leads to gridlock and Congress being unable to get anything done. The American people end up disaproving of the job that Congress is doing. They then blame the majority party for the failures. The strategy has worked well for both sides.
You are a total hole, rino dung, name one piece of legislation that didn't involve tax cuts for the uber-wealthy that the pugs passed when they were a monopoly. You can't because they did nothing but rubberstamp these criminals in everything they did. Oh and BTW, since you are nothing but an apologist for these murderous thugs you will be right next to them in their circle of hell for your complicity. Enjoy.
Hmmm. You must be one of the Daily Kos people.
The Republicans crying about Democrats not doing anything is doubly deceitful. As already pointed out, they are quickly becoming the most obstructionist party in all of history. They are refusing to allow any democratic legislation come to a vote...and then they run to the media to talk about how lazy the dems are.
But it should also be pointed out that Republicans had 6 years in office and did absolutely nothing but name libraries and take unethical golfing trips with lobbyists. Just by passing the min. wage legislation, the Democrats have already done more than the Republicans over the past 6 years.
So considering the republicans did absolutely nothing when they had power, other than hand over the reigns of dictatorship to Bush, they have no right to criticise the democrats.
Look. The Dems did the same thing w/ judicial nominations.
If you want the votes, elect Dems or deal with it.
Thank you soundbite.com. Please return to your bubble for next orders.
"If you disagree with any or all of the political satire on this blog, we apologize for the intellectual abuse inflicted upon you by your university professors." would it be fair to say that anyone who disagrees with you is struggling with a diminshed set of intellectual tools?
I can write code that IE7 will run at least.
Jesus christ how in hell can any repube suggest anything about Dems not passing legislation. Please anybody, any shill on this site--Tommy rino etc--name ONE piece of legislation the repubes passed during the six years when they were a monopoly--name one! McConnell is flat out lying here and if Wolf wasn't so occupied with fellating him maybe he would call him on it.
Looking from the (FAR) left, I can spy the John Warner Defense Authorization Act (cancelled Habeas Corpus), the "legalization" of the unwarranted surveillance embroglio, the "Patriot Act" and renewal, and 177 tax cut bills. Now, none of those are good legislation - something leaps to mind about "circles of hell", and I picture Repugnants owning all the "hot" spots - but they certainly reached Bungle's desk for signature.
It was ok for McConnell to limit facts to those that support his view, he is a player in an adversarial political process. It was not ok for Bash to just echo him. It's reporting at its most stupid and insepid. However I also note the Dems have done a lousy job of communicating that it is the Republicans that have prevented Congress from "getting anything done".
Remember the "nucleur option" and all the press the repubs generated over those "obstructionist" dems when the roles were reversed? The Dems need to get better at generating the scripts that the press needs to sell their news. News is a competitive entertainment industry. They gotta have good scripts.