Larry Klayman Takes Down CNN's Don Lemon Over NSA Surveillance Lawsuit

Politico.com:

Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman got into an argument on CNN with host Don Lemon and legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin when he was brought on to discuss his victory this week in a lawsuit challenging NSA surveillance, resulting in Lemon cutting him off the screen and Klayman comparing Lemon to disgraced former MSNBC host Martin Bashir.

Klayman’s appearance Tuesday night on CNN was preceded by a profile of him that included a quotation from a former George W. Bush staffer saying his lawsuits were about “fighting for himself and his own, in my opinion, delusions of grandeur.”

When Klayman was brought into the conversation, he came out firing.

“I think it is important to note that you’re a big supporter of Obama,” Klayman said to Lemon. “That you have favored him in every respect. You have to try to do a hit piece to diminish a very important decision.”

Lemon interjected to clarify that Klayman was speaking about him personally, saying, “None of that is true, but go on.”

“Well, it is true. I’ve watched you for many years. You’re an ultra-leftist and you’re a big supporter of Obama,” Klayman said. “Let’s talk about the NSA, let’s not talk about Larry Klayman. This victory is for the American people. It wasn’t for me. And you, as somebody from the left … should appreciate that you don’t have a police state in this country that’s going to be able to intimidate Americans to chill their free speech rights.”

RELATED: Federal judge rules against NSA spying

CNN’s Carol Costello: Obama’s People Can Be ‘Nasty,’ Willing to ‘Threaten Your Job’

Mediaite.com:

On Wednesday morning, CNN Newsroom anchor Carol Costello made a rather stunning, if cryptic, revelation. In discussing the firing of national security official Jofi Joseph, Costello agreed with panelist Jason Johnson that the Obama administration can be thin-skinned, and said that “President Obama’s people can be quite nasty. They don’t like you to say anything bad about their boss, and they’re not afraid to use whatever means they have at hand to stop you from doing that, including threatening your job.”

Johnson’s reaction to the firing was that “we had to see more of the tweets. It’s kind of inappropriate, so I can understand him being fired. But the Obama administration is very thin-skinned.”

Costello read some more of the tweets, then said to Johnson “(Y) ou really do have a point. I felt it first hand when I was reporting on the presidential race. I mean, President Obama’s people can be quite nasty. They don’t like you to say anything bad about their boss, and they’re not afraid to use whatever means they have at hand to stop you from doing that, including threatening your job.”

RELATED: What’s Wrong With ‘Rooting For Failure’?

Fort Hood 2009? CNN Anchor Carol Costello Can't Remember the Last Shooting at 'U.S. Military Facility'

Newsbusters.org:

During CNN's live coverage of Monday's shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, anchor Carol Costello asked when the last time was that a gunman wreaked "havoc at a U.S. military facility." In 2009, a jihadist killed 13 in a mass-shooting at Fort Hood in Texas. 

"I used to work in Washington, live in Washington. This seems so unusual to me that a gunman could create this kind of havoc at a U.S. military facility," Costello stated. "Have you ever heard of it happening before, Brian?" she asked correspondent Brian Todd, reporting live from the vicinity of the shooting.

Costello added that "this is so unusual, because this is such a heavily-secured military facility. I've worked in Washington for many years, I've never heard of such a thing happening." She may have been referring to shootings at military bases near Washington, D.C., though her question simply referred to a "U.S. military facility."

RELATED: 12 victims slain in Navy Yard shooting rampage; dead suspect ID'd

CNN Report Slams Obama Administration on Benghazi: "Inconsistent, Conflicting, Inaccurate"

Townhall.com:

Perhaps I spoke to soon in criticizing CNN's John King for focusing so much of his Benghazi analysis on Republicans exploiting -- or thinking of exploiting -- the scandal for political purposes.  In a segment that aired as part of the network's special report on the terrorist attack, King was harshly critical of the administration's handling of the massacre and its aftermath:

"There is no disputing this: The explanations have at times been inconsistent, conflicting, and inaccurate ... [Carney soundbyte on single minor change to talking points].  That's just not true.  We now know the National Security Council staff was behind several edits and the State Department pushed others."

In the column I critiqued this morning, King also cites "indefensible" policy decisions carried out by the Clinton State Department in the months and weeks leading up to the raid -- including several attempted attacks on the US diplomatic mission itself:

Nearly a year later, Benghazi remains a flashpoint in Washington for two very different reasons: indefensible pre-attack policy decisions and irresistible post-attack politics. The Obama White House, from the president on down, complains of "phony" Republican-led congressional investigations. Yet the administration's own reluctant, and at times inaccurate, responses to congressional inquiries have contributed to the GOP charge that the administration, at a minimum, has been less than transparent. "We need to get to the bottom of what happened that terrible night, why it happened, and how we can prevent similar tragedies in the future," House Speaker John Boehner said last week in serving notice the House Benghazi investigations would continue into the fall, and include new subpoenas for documents and testimony if necessary. There are legitimate questions about why repeated and specific warnings about the Benghazi security situation were undervalued or ignored.

It's a pretty sure bet that CNN's renewed interest in this story -- including reportage on major new revelations, withering assessments of the administration's conduct, and an interview with a defiant attacker on the ground in Libya -- led to the filing of criminal charges yesterday.  Though many of these questions remain as pertinent today as they were months ago, a new line of inquiry has opened up:  What was the US government really up to in Benghazi?  Why were so many CIA operatives in the city?  How did their operation blow up so badly?  And why were the injured and dying essentially abandoned for nearly a full day?  In light of recent embassy closings, drone strikes, and other threats, this pre-election bravado seems a tad unseemly:

RELATED:  Jay Carney on CNN’s big CIA/Benghazi scoop: I don’t know nothing ’bout nothing

Bill O’Reilly vs. Alan Colmes Family Spat Shows Why There’s Fox News…And There’s Everyone Else

Mediaite.com:

George W. Bush wins the 2000 Presidential Election by (in essence) 537 votes; Fox News goes to #1 in the cable news race a few months later. 

Bush narrowly beats John Kerry in 2004. Not surprisingly, Fox is still #1, and by a wider margin. 

Barack Obama soundly defeats John McCain in 2008; Fox is still #1 by a Secretariat-esque margin. 

Mr. Obama decisively beats Mitt Romney four months ago; Regardless of which party holds executive power, Fox is still decimating the competition, albeit by a slightly smaller-than-usual margin. Sure, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell are periodically beating Sean Hannity and Greta Van Susteren in the demo, but for 22 other hours out of the day, it’s not even a fair fight. 

So why does this keep happening? 

Why, for the better part of 12 years, can’t anyone seriously challenge Fox News? 

The country IS becoming more socially progressive, whether it be gay rights, legal pot or its attitude toward illegal immigrants. 

So why isn’t the country—of which 51.1 percent of its registered voters went for Mr. Obama last fall—moving away from a network that many of its critics call an extension of the Republican Party? 

The answer played itself out again this week starting on Tuesday’s night O’Reilly Factor: Bill O’Reilly is speaking with his usual Tuesday night guests in the form of Monica Crowley (conservative) and Alan Colmes (liberal). This is a segment that has existed for years. Colmes is married to Crowley’s sister, bringing a Carville-Matalin element (sort of) to the show. The topic is sequester, who’s to blame, and particularly if the President has any inclination to ever cut anything given his record over his first 50 months in office. 

Part I: O’Reilly claims that Mr. Obama has no inclination to reduce spending, wants Colmes to specifically list what the President is willing to eliminate. 

Part II: Colmes claims that Mr. Obama has been receptive to Medicare and other entitlement cuts, but is speaking in general terms and therefore isn’t as specific as O’Reilly wants…

Part III: O’Reilly (clearly frustrated), calls Colmes a liar, and comes close to dropping an s-bomb on the air, characterizing Colmes’ argument is “bull-blank” and “jack”. The 63-year-old host proceeds to point his finger at his longtime co-worker no less than a half-dozen times, but later apologizes for calling Colmes a liar (while still maintaining he wasn’t being specific in terms of exact cuts). 

But it doesn’t end there on Tuesday’s show: John Stossel, longtime ABC News reporter now Fox News libertarian, doesn’t stick with the original segment topic he was invited on The Factor to talk about. Instead, he tells O’Reilly to his face that he was “obnoxious” and “out of line.” 

The next day, there is no memorandum from Roger Ailes or Bill Shine (Senior VP of Programming) stating that no one else at the network should talk about the incidents. Instead, the other opinion shows—knowing that they’ve got a hot story—use that freedom to run with it, give it legs. 

The hosts of The Five predictably support O’Reilly in his argument that the President doesn’t have the ability or courage to cut spending. Juan Williams, filling in for the show’s lone liberal, Bob Beckel, gamely defends Colmes. 

Three hours later, Kirsten Powers—the “female Colmes” who progressives loathe for actually having the audacity to occasionally go against the usual talking points of her party—confronts O’Reilly directly on his show, says he’s “100 percent wrong” in his argument against the President. She goes on to detail $400 billion in cuts toward federal healthcare spending Mr. Obama proposed, even tweeting out the PDF she used after the segment to drive home her point. 

Remember, O’Reilly is the LeBron James at Fox News: He’s the network’s highest-paid, most influential, most revered player on the team. He’s authored multiple best-sellers, he’s host of a program that destroys everything in the ratings and has since 2001, and is such an influential personality that he receives regular guest invites on CBS, NBC, ABC, The View, Letterman and Leno. 

Yet here’s Kirsten Powers, a liberal contributor, a fellow employee at Fox News who gets infinite crap on a daily basis from fellow liberals for sleeping with the enemy, telling him he’s full of it on his own program. 

You want to know why Fox is #1? 

Let me answer a question with a question: Could you ever picture this scenario happening at MSNBC or CNN? 

Let’s use MSNBC as an example since it’s more opinion-based (hell, it’s ALL opinion-based now): 

Rachel Maddow invites Michael Steele (former head of the RNC and current MSNBC contributor) on her program. They get into an argument over whatever, things get heated. Maddow calls Steele a liar, saying his perspective is complete BS. 

Could you ever, EVER, see O’Donnell calling out Maddow for her treatment of Steele? How about The Cycle? Would S.E. Cupp rush to Steele’s defense while Touré mocked him while defending Maddow? 

Would, say, Steve Schmidt (MSNBC contributor, former McCain campaign manager) come on Maddow’s show the next night and say to her face that she was totally out of line?

The answer, from what we’ve seen, is no. Sure, there is disagreement between guests, small-time players on the network…but not to this degree, not to this level of candor.

Hardball has its share of yelling (mainly from the host) but does that disagreement carry into other shows?

Not on your life. 

Note: This isn’t a moral argument based on good behavior or a better code of ethics. Rather, it is simply one that focuses on which network is more compelling in terms of its personalities and the manner by which they interact with each other. 

And that’s why there’s Fox, and there’s everyone else. It is much like the dynamic of the Howard Stern Show: A mix of characters all willing to take on Howard and each other, and in the most honest of ways.

There simply is no filter on Howard’s show, and the audience revels in being able to witness a family fight on an almost-daily basis. Most importantly, none of the fights are planned or scripted. 

It just happens, just like it does in homes every day across the country. People can relate and therefore can appreciate what they’re hearing. 

Lawrence O’Donnell sat in judgment of the O’Reilly-Colmes brawl just hours after it happened, mocking the former for losing his cool. 

What O’Donnell doesn’t get, what his network will never understand, is that this is the kind of stuff that makes O’Reilly and Fox untouchable: They’re willing to attack each other based on their opinions and principles, all while his brethren at MSNBC wouldn’t dare call out its own in a similar situation. 

Debate and strong opinions are what cable news is all about, even when those opinions are directed at those you may run into at the company cafeteria. 

Fox News gets that. 

Everyone else…well…just look at the numbers.

RELATED:  Unintended Consequences: Cable News Taunting Good For Ego, Not Good For Business

Kirsten Powers: Obama Doesn’t Call On Fox News At Pressers ‘Because He Doesn’t Want To Be Embarrassed’

Speaking truth to power:

Kirsten Powers slammed President Obama Saturday in a roundtable discussion on why Fox News reporters never get called on at the president’s solo press conferences. It’s “because he doesn’t want to be embarrassed,” Powers said. She added that questions from Fox News would be “tenacious” and on subjects “he doesn’t want to get asked about.” 

“He wants softballs,” Powers said. 

Host Jon Scott noted that in a recent study, it was shown that Fox News gets called on at “less than half of the rates” of the other top outlets. ABC reporters get chosen the most frequently, followed by CBS, the AP, NBC and Fox News comes in at ninth place. 

When Obama is asked a question by Fox News, Powers said, it’s similar to when Jay Carney “ends up looking stupid because he doesn’t know how to answer.” 

The rests of the panelists agreed with Powers and said it was “brave” to challenge the “liberal mainstream media.” 

RELATED: Creepy? CNN Reporter Writes Letter To Obama EVERY SINGLE DAY

CNN Fact Checks Despicable Obama Super Pac Ad Blaming Mitt Romney For Steelworkers Wife's Death

HotAir.com:

They won’t attack him for being Mormon (I hope), so calling him a murderer will have to do:

The pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action lobbed a heavy-duty attack at Mitt Romney this morning, airing an ad that links the closure of a GST Steel plant in Kansas City to the loss of a family’s health insurance — and the death of a woman some time later…
In the case of this particularly jarring super PAC ad, it may also be relevant that Soptic’s wife died in 2006, years after the GST factory closed down…

I asked Priorities USA strategist Bill Burton to explain the connection between Romney, Bain and a cancer fatality that happened near the end of Romney’s tenure as governor of Massachusetts. The lapse in time between the plant closing and Soptic’s death doesn’t mean the ad is invalid, but it raises questions about the cause and effect relationship here.

“We’re illustrating how long it took for communities and individuals to recover from the closing of these businesses,” Burton responded. “Families and individuals had to find new jobs, new sources of health insurance and a way to make up for the pensions they lost. Mitt Romney has had an enduring impact on the lives of thousands of men and women and for many of them, that impact has been devastating.”

Romney stopped doing work for Bain in 1999; the steel plant in question here closed down in 2001; Soptic’s wife passed away in 2006; and yet, Romney’s somehow culpable. Perfection. You know what’s really interesting about this spot? It’s not even a health-care ad. It’d be sleazy under any circumstances, but there’d at least be a concrete policy angle if Burton was selling it as an argument for, say, single-payer, to decouple insurance from employment. He’s not. There appears to be no actual policy argument here at all, unless The One now opposes layoffs on principle, for fear that someone somewhere might be left without insurance. Is that where our very pro-business president — seriously, just ask him — is now at? As John Sexton says, does this mean O himself is on the hook until 2014 for any deaths that resulted from GM dealerships being closed in 2009? I thought workers bore some responsibility to find a new job with insurance after they’re laid off, but if he wants to take the blame for human tragedies at Government Motors, fine by me.

I have to say, though, it’s a comfort to me to know that Hopenchange will be well and truly shattered come November, no matter what happens on election day. Even if he pulls it out, after a campaign like this the idea that he and his team represent some sort of new, more exalted form of politics will be fully exposed for the joke that it is. His second term won’t be better, but at least people won’t be kidding themselves anymore, if any still are. There’s some small consolation in that.

RELATED: Risky Obama PAC Ad Linking Romney To Steelworker’s Wife’s Death Highly Likely To Backfire

Bill O’Reilly And Bernie Goldberg Blast CNN For Playing ‘Stupid Girls’ During Palin Segment

Mediaite.com:

During Monday evening’s O’Reilly Factor, Bill O’Reilly and frequent guest Bernard Goldberg took on CNN for its use of and subsequent apology for the Pink song “Stupid Girls” playing during the introduction to a segment about former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.


In the wake of the outrage over the song’s seemingly purposeful placement, CNN apologized and said “the music selection was a poor choice and not intended to be linked to any news story.” O’Reilly joked, to off-set laughter, “Then why was it used before a news story?”


“The most offensive part of all of this is this statement by a news organization whose only mission is to tell the truth and they say this was unintentional,” Goldberg said. “They have literally millions of songs in their database to choose from. They could have picked ‘Fly Me to the Moon’ from Frank Sinatra, they could have picked anything. They picked ‘Stupid Girls’ and they have the nerve to tell us it was unintentional.


O’Reilly then asked Goldberg what CNN meant by the song not being meant to be connected to a story. “What was ‘Stupid Girls’ connected to if not the news story about Sarah Palin?”


“CNN and other news organizations expect politicians to tell the truth; they expect business people to tell the truth; they expect church people, they expect athletes to tell the truth,” Goldberg responded. “And they issue a statement like this…. I’m guessing the people who watch them don’t like Sarah Palin all that much anyway, which is why they did it, and thought that, like in the old days, they could get away with it.


“Well, it’s not the old days anymore, CNN,” Goldberg concluded, “you can’t get away with this stuff.”

RELATED: CNN: Playing 'Stupid Girls' Ahead of Sarah Palin Story a 'Poor Choice'

Politiks As Usual: In The News 6/25/12

Romney Camp Fights Claims of Shipping Jobs Overseas

Obama’s Great American Novel 

Charles Barron, Black Racist and New York's Next Democratic Congressman 

Republicans Missing Chance on Education Reform

Soros-Funded Activist Gave Reagan Portrait The Finger At White House

CNN’s Belief Blog: ‘Can ‘True Catholics’ Support Same Sex Marriage?’

Howard Kurtz Scolds Andrea Mitchell for Expressing 'No Regret' for 'Deceptively Edited' Romney Video

Reuters Poll: 73% of Independents Oppose Obamacare

Obama Congratulates Muslim Brotherhood Leader

Missing The Point on Fast and Furious

Chris Matthews Explains How Obama Went From Black To White In 2008 Campaign

Video: Green-tech Stimulus Recipient Went Broke … A Second Time

Video: Follow The Ideology

CNN’s Ashleigh Banfield Tears Into Obama Campaign Spokesperson Over Bain Ad

Mediaite.com:

Obama For America Campaign National Press Sec. Ben LaBolt squared off with CNN anchor Ashleigh Banfield on Tuesday in a contentious interview. Banfield took LaBolt to task over several assertions made in the most recent ad that focuses on Mitt Romney’s tenure at Bain and a factory which had its assets sold off and its workers laid off in the early 2000s. What follows was a heated session in which Banfield seemed troubled that she could not get LaBolt to admit the Obama campaign stretched the facts in this latest ad.

The interview turned contentious almost immediately, as Banfield took LaBolt on over the ads numerous assertions that were determined to be less-than-factual. 

“Mitt Romney has asked us to judge his tenure as a corporate buyout specialist – he’s listed that as his lead qualification for the presidency,” said LaBolt. “We’re not questioning the private equity industry as a whole, we’re questioning Mitt Romney’s economic philosophy. Is that the type of economic philosophy you’d like to see in the Oval Office where Mitt Romney and the wealthiest few profit at the expense of the middle class.” 

Banfield cited the Washington Post’s fact checker which gave the ad one out of four “Pinocchio.” She said that the paper was considering giving the Obama team’s ad “two pinnochios.”

RELATED:  CNN anchor to Obama spokesman: You’re smearing Romney with this Bain attack ad, you know; Update: Obama bundler tired of “vilification” of the rich

CNN's 'Objective' Don Lemon Appeared at Two Events Featuring Sebelius, Received 'Visibility' Award at Pro-Gay Gala

Newsbusters.org:

If you were wondering about CNN's objectivity on liberal issues like gay rights, the lines became a whole lot more blurred recently as anchor Don Lemon received a "Visibility" award from the pro-gay Human Rights Campaign at its North Carolina gala, where Obama's HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius spoke and stumped for the President's re-election.


Then on Friday, Sebelius addressed middle school students at an anti-bullying event where Lemon served as the moderator of an anti-bullying panel. His appearances at events with an Obama cabinet member blur the lines of objectivity and his receiving an award from a gay-rights organization makes his liberal bias all the clearer.


At the anti-bullying event, Lemon asked Sebelius about combating bullying. She responded that kids should tell bullies they're being jerks, after a film had been presented telling the audience of kids not to call others jerks.


And at the HRC gala, Lemon quoted Martin Luther King in his acceptance speech that "There comes a time where silence equals betrayal," in reference to his own coming out as openly-gay. Could he also have been referring to his colleague Anderson Cooper's widely-discussed silence on his own personal lifestyle?


Lemon's words echo his statement from last May, where he professed his hope to "change minds" by coming out – as in, by coming out as openly-gay and not remaining silent, he hopes that will change people's minds on the issue. Contrast that with his telling Joy Behar that he would remain "objective" as a reporter.


And who was one of the corporate sponsors for the HRC gala? Time Warner, Inc., which owns CNN.

Hypocrite Obama Communications Director David Axelrod: Bill Maher Doesn’t Play Same Role As GOP ‘De Facto Boss’ Rush Limbaugh

To think this is CNN, of all places, pointing out liberal hypocrisy:

On Thursday, CNN’s Erin Burnett spoke with David Axelrod, the communications director for President Obama’s re-election campaign, about his recently-canceled plans to appear on controversial host Bill Maher‘s HBO program.


Burnett brought up Axelrod’s condemnation of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh for having called Georgetown student and activist Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” — a condemnation that proved problematic in light of his decision to appear on Maher’s show given the comedian’s own history of referring to women — mainly, but not solely, conservative women in the public eye, like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann — by derogatory names.


Burnett then asked Axelrod if Maher’s recent million dollar donation to a pro-Obama Super PAC should be returned in light of his comments.


Well, first of all, let me say there’s been a coarsening of our political culture. I don’t think that language is appropriate, no matter who uses it. And I think whoever you are in politics, you ought to be willing to say so. I was disappointed that Governor Romney didn’t stand up more forcefully when Rush Limbaugh said what he said.


But understand that these words that Maher has used in his standup act are a little bit different than — not excusable in any way — but different than a guy with 23 million radio listeners using his broadcast platform to malign a young woman for speaking her mind in the most inappropriate, grotesque ways.


Nor does Bill Maher play the role in the Democratic party that Rush Limbaugh plays in the Republican party, where he’s really the de facto boss of the party. Everybody responds to him, which is the reason why I think Governor Romney was afraid to take him on.


When Burnett noted that, as a public figure herself, she wouldn’t appreciate being called a “c-word” by anyone, Axelrod reiterated that he isn’t trying to “excuse” anyone.


“I do not excuse those kinds of characterizations of women,” he said. “I don’t think those kind of gratuitous, nasty words — about anyone — is appropriate in the public sphere. I’m not excusing anyone. But I think what– what Limbaugh did was was particularly egregious. And it wasn’t just once. He built on it and built on it to the point where he built into a sort of perverse soliloquy at the end about, you know, whether she post her…. relationships online.”


“I can respect that,” replied Burnett, agreeing that Limbaugh’s comments about Fluke had been “disgusting.”


As for the whether the Priorities USA Super PAC should or will return Maher’s hefty donation, Axelrod stressed that it would be illegal of him to become involved in the group’s decisions, but “as a general rule, I don’t think those words belong in the public space.”


Later, Burnett reported that Maher’s contribution makes up 15 percent of the Super PAC’s total contributions since it was established.


CNN contributor John Avlon described Axelrod’s response as a “dodge,” noting that a pervading problem in politics is people’s willingness to defend those on “their side,” while condemning those on the other for the same or similar actions.

RELATED: David Axelrod Cancels Bill Maher Appearance

Newt Gingrich Rips John King/CNN For Opening Debate With ‘Open Marriage’ Question

This was pretty powerful:

Republican hopeful Newt Gingrich excoriated CNN’s John King at Thursday’s South Carolina debate for asking if the former Speaker of the House wanted to respond to the allegations by Gingrich’s ex-wife that he had asked her for an “open marriage.”


“No, but I will,” a visibly angered Gingrich fumed. “I think the destructive vicious negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office. I’m appalled you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that.”


“Is that all you want to say, sir?” King responded.


“Let me finish,” Gingrich replied. “Every person in here knows personal pain. Every person in here has had someone close to them go through painful things. To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary, a significant question in a presidential campaign, is as close to despicable as anything i can imagine. My two daughters, my two daughters wrote the head of ABC and made the point that it was wrong, that they should pull it, and I am, frankly, astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate.”


“This story did not come from our network,” King contended. “As you also know, it is the subject of conversation on the campaign. I get your point, I take –”


“John, it was repeated by your network,” Gingrich interjected. “You chose to start the debate with it. Don’t blame it on somebody else. You and your staff chose to start the debate with it.”

RELATED: Santorum tries to shoulder past Romney, Gingrich in debate

Muammar Gaddafi Dead: CNN Airs More Al Jazeera Footage Of Gaddafi’s Corpse

Mediaite.com:

This afternoon on CNN, Wolf Blitzer presented video, via Al Jazeera, of a deceased Muammar Gaddafi and asked his panelists to weigh in with their thoughts.


One of the panelists offered a translation of the video, which relayed that Gaddafi’s death was to be expected given that he ignored his people’s cries for freedom and democracy. She wondered how things might have turned out had there been regime reform in Libya, rather than an entire regime overhaul. The panel then wondered how such changes would impact countries beyond Libya, extending as far as, say, North Korea or China.

RELATED: President Obama On Gaddafi’s Death: “This Is A Momentous Day In The History Of Libya”

Politiks As Usual: In The News 8/1/11

Debt Deal Vote Likely On Monday, Party Sources Say

Joe Biden Charges Secret Service Rent To Use Cottage Next To His Home

New York Times Reader Kills Dozens In Norway

Climate Change Alarmist Alarmed They're Wrong

CNN In The Tank For Gay Marriage

Woman Who Killed Kids At Center Of Custody Fight

Herman Cain Apologizes After Meeting With Muslim Leaders

UCLA's Tim Groseclose On 'How Liberal Media Bias Distorts The American Mind'

George W. Bush To Be In NYC To Mark 10th Anniversary Of 9/11

Adult Stem Cells Work Better, MSM Only Likes Embryonic Kind. Hmm.

Cancer-striken WTC Worker Gets $0 Settlement Check

CNN Ignores Poll Results Showing Strong Support for 'Cut, Cap, and Balance'

Don't believe the spin esp. when it's coming from the lamestream media:

CNN touted results from its newly-released poll Thursday showing Americans favor a balance of spending cuts and tax increases in the debt ceiling debate, as well as raising the debt ceiling. What the network completely failed to report -- although NewsBusters reported it -- was that Americans also favored two conservative positions – passage of a balanced budget amendment, along with spending cuts and future spending caps.


CNN's deputy political director Paul Steinhauser emphasized that the poll results favored Democrats over Republicans. He insisted that "the headline here is Americans want compromise," and pointed out that 64 percent of respondents favored including both spending cuts and tax increases, "kind of like what the president is suggesting, what the Gang of Six is suggesting."




Then he reported that President Obama and the Democrats will receive less blame than congressional Republicans if no deal is reached by the deadline, August 2.


During its news coverage from the end of the 1 p.m. EDT hour into the 6 p.m. EDT hour, CNN mentioned at least three times that 62 percent of those polled favored raising the debt ceiling with or without debt reduction. At least twice, the network reported that 64 percent of those polled wanted a plan with both spending cuts and tax increases.


And CNN made sure to report that if no deal is made before the deadline, August 2, only 30 percent would blame President Obama while 51 percent would blame Republicans. They also mentioned the poll result showing that only 33 percent of respondents see the Republicans as acting responsibly in the debt ceiling debate, compared with 51 percent for Obama.


Adhering to the standard Democratic talking points, Time managing editor Rick Stengel told CNN's Wolf Blitzer during the 6 p.m. EDT hour of The Situation Room that if tax rates go up in 2013, it's "not a tax hike," demanding that "this is something that Republicans have to get used to."


Stengel was reacting to a clip of Paul Ryan saying that if the Bush tax cuts are permitted to lapse in 2013, that's a "massive tax increase." Stengel ridiculed that as "Washington-speak."

CNN Anchor Don Lemon Reveals That He Sleeps With Men, Plays The 'Born Gay' Lie

Of course, on the Left he's the new Harriet Tubman or something because he sleeps with men instead of women. But then, as CNN is supposed to be network that tries to stay "neutral" on the issues, is there any way this guy can do his job without some pro-gay bias along with some smearing Christianity at the same time? Oh goodie, Newsbusters reports that he already does just that:

Lemon has a history of pro-gay bias at CNN, featuring soft interviews of pro-gay figures and hinting that Christian churches preach the same hateful message against homosexuality that the fringe Westboro Baptist Church promotes – "God hates fags."


Last June, Lemon hosted former Army Lt. Dan Choi for a softball interview along with another homosexual activist. Choi became a poster boy for the gay-rights movement and the repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" when his open declaration of his sexuality sent him packing from the military. "Was it worth the prize for speaking out?" Lemon asked Choi of his honorable discharge from the Army.


Twice last summer, Lemon hosted the same-sex couple who was the subject of CNN's slanted documentary "Gary And Tony Have A Baby" and was sympathetic to their cause. Once he asked them if they were "role models" for the gay-rights movement. "How much pressure are you feeling with so much attention for your experience? Do you feel like the gay community, in many ways, view you guys as role models?"


He also featured former NBA player John Amaechi in 2007, who publicly came out as a homosexual after his career. Lemon asked Amaechi if the NBA is "mature" enough to handle an openly-gay player. "Do you think that the NBA now is ready for a player who may be out while they're playing? Do you think the league is mature enough to handle that?"


During a segment in March with ex-Catholic priest Fr. Alberto Cutie, Lemon outlandishly hinted that Christian churches preach the same hateful message against homosexuality that the fringe Westboro Baptist Church touts, whose website reads "God hates fags."


"So father, listen, do you consider Westboro – most people don't consider it a legitimate church, okay? But is this – aren't they saying the same thing that's reinforced by religion that's being preached from the pulpit in many churches on Sunday?"

Bashing Sarah Palin Doesn't Work For New CNN "Parker/Spitzer" Show, Finishes Dead Last

Really now, besides the fact that one of your co-hosts is a recently disgraced ex-governor who repeatedly cheated on his wife with hookers, did CNN execs really think that going the MSNBC route and bringing on idiot liberal B-listers to bash Sarah Palin was going to give your new show a boost?

No joke: Out of an hour’s worth of programming, this is the 90 seconds they’re touting on CNN.com. Because, after all, if you’re a Palin-hater itching to see her demonized, how many options do you have on cable news at 8 p.m.? Oh, right — Olbermann does this every night of the year. Good work, CNN.

Please to contain your surprise upon learning that last night’s debut finished … dead last in its time slot. Yes, even behind whatever it is that Headline News runs during that hour. Good lord. Not even a respectable third place for the premiere? No public curiosity to see Client Number Nine in, er, action?

Parker Spitzer finished 4th in total viewers and the A25-54 demographic. It also lost viewers from the lead-in at 7pmET, John King USA, in total viewers…

Parker Spitzer did improve on the lead-in in the demo, and was up week-to-week in demo as well. A CNN spokesperson tells Mediaite: “We are pleased with the quality of the show and over time we think viewers will be drawn to the more thoughtful discussion and lively debate that Kathleen and Eliot have to offer.”

Reuters has a brutal round-up of the opening night reviews but all you really need to read is the New York Post’s headline to get the flavor. In fact, among all the reactions I’ve seen, the only bit of contrarianism came from a certain conservative atheist — and for once, it wasn’t me. Exit question: Is it already time for a “Parker Spitzer” cancellation watch? Over/under is New Year’s, I guess.

CNN's John King Bashes Obama for Calling Fox 'Destructive' and MSNBC 'Invaluable'

Newsbusters.org:

CNN's John King on Wednesday mocked Barack Obama for calling Fox News a "destructive" force in our society while at practically the same time a White House spokesman was saying MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow provide "an invaluable service" to the country.


As NewsBusters reported Tuesday, the President bashed FNC in a just-published interview with Rolling Stone magazine shortly before his Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton was praising MSNBC during a gaggle held on Air Force One.


With this in mind, on Wednesday's "John King USA," the host surprisingly derided the White House's inconsistency.

Wolf Blitzer Takes Down Hypocrite Mexican President Felipe Calderon's Stance On Arizona's SB1070 Law

Mediaite.com:

After appearing before Congress and attacking Arizona’s new illegal immigration law, Mexican president Felipe Calderón appeared on CNN to talk shop with Wolf Blitzer. Blitzer, rather surprisingly, turned the tables on the president, opting to ask him instead about his country’s immigration laws, and whether they were just as strict (if not stricter) than Arizona’s. Calderón admitted that laws were stringent in the past but clarified that it is currently not illegal to be undocumented in Mexico.

Citing a Washington Times article explaining Mexican immigration laws that incriminated those who willfully participated in illegal immigration or helped illegal immigrants, Blitzer asked President Calderón to contrast those laws with Arizona’s. Calderón replied that, while the Times assessment used to be true, it is no longer, and immigration cannot be illegal in Mexico. “Of course, on the border, we are asking people ‘Who are you?’” explained Calderón, and “Once they are inside the country, what the Mexican police do is, of course, enforce the law, but any means immigration is a crime anymore in Mexico… if someone does that, we find them and sending [sic] them back.”

In response to that, Blitzer noted that many in the US do not know that Mexico does not criminalize illegal immigration, and reference the older, harsher laws to argue that border states are only trying to do what Mexico does in its lower half, as well. Calderón accepted the criticism, and said he took it into account when discussing immigration laws:

Shocked to say the least. But then if Anderson Cooper (of late) and now Wolf Blitzer continue to yunno . . . do their jobs as credible journalists and present both sides of the story, CNN's ratings might actually go up.