Tag Archives: john roberts

Most Economists Want All Tax Cuts Extended; CNN’s Roberts Sees Need to ‘Bump Up’ Govt’s ‘Revenue Stream’

A new CNN/Money survey of 31 top economists found a majority of them say the top priority — given the weak state of the economy — is for Congress to extend the Bush tax cuts for all income groups. But talking about this policy recommendation with CNN/Money’s Paul La Monica on Monday’s American Morning, co-anchor John Roberts rued the conundrum of needing to keep tax rates low for economic reasons — putting “more money in the pockets of people” — while at the same time, because of the “frightening” trillion-dollar deficits, “you’ve got to bump up your [the government’s] revenue stream.” Roberts fretted: You want to put more money in the pockets of people, particularly when you look at unemployment over 9 percent. But then at the same time you have these deficits that are running at an absolutely frightening rate of a trillion-plus dollars a year. So, you’ve got to bump up your revenue stream but at the same time you want to keep your money coming into the economy. So how do you reconcile that calculation? It seems not to have occurred to Roberts that the way to avoid either monstrous deficits or suffocating tax increases is to reduce government to a more affordable size. Looking at the details of CNN’s survey of economists, it’s understandable why they would want the tax cuts extended. Their average forecast is for unemployment to be just below 9% at the end of next year, a full fifteen months from now, with a quarter of those surveyed seeing the unemployment rate still at 9.5% or higher in December 2011. As for the consequences of letting the tax cuts expire, just today, the Heritage Foundation released a comprehensive study showing that the tax hikes envisioned by President Obama would lead to slower economic growth, lower family income, higher interest rates and a loss of an average of 600,000 private sector jobs each year from 2011 through 2020, or 6 million fewer jobs total. Liberals are already trying to frame the deficit debate as one of making sure government has the money it needs to pay for the vast expansion President Obama and congressional Democrats achieved over the past 19 months. A fair and balanced news media would put much of the onus on liberals to backtrack on their massive spending commitments before requiring the beleaguered private sector to kick in an even greater share. Here’s the exchange during the 8am ET hour of CNN’s American Morning, September 20: JOHN ROBERTS: Seventeen minutes now after the hour. We have 110 days until the Bush tax cuts are set to expire and the debate over whether to extend them has absolutely consumed Capitol Hill. The strongest impact will most certainly be felt in the bank accounts of millions of Americans. CANDY CROWLEY: Minding your business this morning, CNN/Money’s Paul La Monica. President Obama is suggesting that the tax cuts should expire only for the richest 3 percent of taxpayers but there are economist who say that may not be the best idea. [turns to La Monica] So, is it? PAUL LA MONICA: Yeah, we surveyed 31 leading economists and a majority, 18 of them, said that their top priority if they were a Washington policymaker would be to extend the tax cuts for everyone. ROBERTS: So in terms of extending the tax cuts and what that does for the economy, run the numbers for us. You have got an example here. LA MONICA: Yeah. You have a middle class family, $75,000, you know, two children, you would have about $2600 in higher taxes if the cuts are not extended. ROBERTS: So — for the average family that’s a lot of money, but particularly in these hard economic times, when you know you are worried about, ‘Am I going to keep my job,’ ‘Should I buy that,’ — to not to get hit with an extra bill of $2600, that’s substantial. LA MONICA: Definitely, that’s why I think there is such urgency in Washington to get something done. It does seems that the main issue is, obviously, just trying — whether or not to extend them for everyone or to exclude the wealthiest top percent of the country. I mean a lot of people both Democrats and Republicans think that extending it for the middle class is obviously the right thing that has to be done, particularly in these tough times. CROWLEY: You know those tax cuts are already in place, so I’m going to assume that keeping them doesn’t really change the job market, it simply — the argument is [if they expire] things will get worse for America. LA MONICA: Exactly. It’s similar to two years ago when the financial crisis was really first starting to take hold, a lot of things that Washington or you know, was hoping to do right now is preventing the economy from deteriorating any further. I mean we’ve had obviously hopes of a recovery earlier in the year that have started to fade this summer. And that’s worrying a lot of people on obviously, you know, in Washington and on Wall Street. ROBERTS: So when you look at the calculation, Paul, you’ve got your rock and you’ve got your hard place. The rock being you want more money coming in to the economy itself so you want to put more money in the pockets of people, particularly when you look at unemployment over 9 percent. But then at the same time you have these deficits that are running at an absolutely  frightening rate of a trillion-plus dollars a year. So, you’ve got to bump up your revenue stream but at the same time you want to keep your money coming into the economy. So how do you reconcile that calculation? LA MONICA: Yeah, that’s very difficult. It’s the classic short-term versus long-term solution right now that people are trying to weigh. What is more important? A lot of people that we have spoken to at CNN/Money say that really Washington has to do everything in their power to help the middle class extending these tax cuts is likely something that can do that even though it could add to the deficit in the short-term. The hope, and admittedly it is something that could bear out over time but you know, you don’t know for certain is that if the economy starts to finally pick up some steam and consumers spend more, primarily because maybe they aren’t getting this bigger tax hit, the deficit could help take care of itself, because a stronger economy leads to higher tax revenue from not just individuals but businesses over the long haul. CROWLEY: Paul, thanks so much for breaking it down. Appreciate it.

View original post here:
Most Economists Want All Tax Cuts Extended; CNN’s Roberts Sees Need to ‘Bump Up’ Govt’s ‘Revenue Stream’

CNN: What Did Kiran Chetry Do That Made John Roberts Snap at Her on the Air?

Take a quick break from speculating about the outcome of the elections this November. There is a new topic that is causing quite a bit of speculation: just what did Kiran Chetry of CNN’s American Morning do last Wednesday that caused co-host John Roberts to pause in the middle of introducing guest David Axelrod and snap at her in a fit of extreme irritability? Almost as funny watching it on TV was the fact that the moment was officially recorded in CNN’s transcripts : DAVID AXELROD, SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you for having me. ROBERTS: Let me ask you first of all, David, before we get into the — excuse me. You would mind not doing that while I’m talking? Thank you. I appreciate that. If you don’t mind. David if, I could just Terry Jones and this Quran burning that is planned for September 11th, what does the president think about that? Does the president — is he as concerned about it as other members of his administration are? That ire was aimed at Chetry, not Axelrod. So what was Kiran Chetry doing that so irritated Roberts? So far no reporting on this mystery from CNN although Mediate described the scene: As Roberts introduced Pres. Obama’s senior adviser, he seemed distracted. “Let me ask you first of all,” pause, smile, restart. “Let me ask you first of all, David, if I could, before we get into the…” Full stop. Then, Roberts turned to where Chetry was sitting next to him (she had been on camera earlier in the segment), and said, with Axelrod still in the double-box shot: “Would you mind not doing that while I’m talking? Thank you, I appreciate that.” Then, added for emphasis and sarcasm, “If you don’t mind.” So, Dear Readers, what do YOU think Kiran Chetry did that set off John Roberts? Here are some possible Chetry actions that could have set off the conniption fit: 1. She was applying lipstick or makeup. 2. She was giving Roberts the Finger. 3. She was trying to cause Roberts to laugh by crossing her eyes. 4. She was grinding her teeth. 5. Polishing her nails. Yes, these are all possibilities but my favorite would be: 6. She held up a copy of American Morning’s incredibly low ratings . The good news for CNN here is that this is a great opportunity to boost American Morning’s basement ratings. They have the rest of today and all weekend to promo this incident on the Situation Room, Anderson Cooper 360, both John and Larry King, and Reliable Sources with a promise to reveal the tape on American Morning Monday of Chetry’s actions that set off the rage in Roberts. Although that show’s ratings will be doomed to sink again, they will at least temporarily enjoy a boost as viewers tune in to find out why John Roberts was not able to keep his anger in check.

CNN: GOP ‘Very Far to the Right’; Guest Laments McCain’s Rightward Lean

On Tuesday’s AC360, CNN’s John Roberts labeled Republican candidates who have Tea Party support ” very far to the right ,” and specifically referred to Florida gubernatorial candidate Rick Scott as an ” ultraconservative .” Guest John Avlon also bemoaned John McCain’s tack to the right during the primary campaign, and slammed how the senator has been called a “RINO” by many conservatives. Roberts, who was filling in for anchor Anderson Cooper, along with Avlon, CNN liberal contributor Roland Martin and Red State’s Erick Erickson, discussed Tuesday’s primary results from several states for two segments during the first half hour of the 10 pm Eastern hour. Eighteen minutes into the hour, the CNN anchor asked TheDailyBeast.com senior political columnist, “[CNN anchor] John King laid it out there, that it’s going to be a challenging year, to say the least, for Democrats. Some people predicting that this will be equal to, if not worse, than 1994. What do you think?” Avlon replied that the GOP was in “reasonable striking distance” of winning control of the House of Representatives, and later added that “the question is, are the candidates the Republicans have been putting forward in these primaries, some of the more polarizing play-to-the-base candidates, are they going to be Kryptonite when it comes to independent voters and folks in the center? That’s really where this battle is going to be won or lost.” Moments later, Roberts asked Erickson about Avlon’s analysis and included his “right” label: ROBERTS: Erick Erickson, speak to what John Avlon was talking to us about. Some of these candidates who are very far to the right , the one- many of the ones who are backed by the Tea Party- are they going to be Kryptonite come November? The anchor brought back Avlon for a second panel discussion, this time with Republican and former Representative Susan Molinari and Democrat Lisa Caputo, a former press secretary for Hillary Clinton. Roberts raised the issue of the Republican gubernatorial primary in Florida with Molinari 46 minutes into the hour: ROBERTS: When it comes to Rick Scott, who ran as an ultraconservative against Bill McCollum, does he now have to run slightly to the center, if he wants to win in November? Put it this way: the campaign- the Rick Scott campaign is reaching out to CNN, to say, ‘Hey, do you want to have him on tomorrow?’ Four minutes later, Roberts broached the issue of McCain’s lurch to the right during the primary race in Arizona against J. D. Hayworth, which ultimately led to Avlon’s lament of the whole electoral battle between the two: ROBERTS: Well, you heard a lot of that- maverick, maverick, maverick, maverick- 2002, his book, ‘Worth the Fighting For,’ said that it was the ‘education of an American maverick.’ But now, John McCain saying, ‘I’m not a maverick. I never said I was a maverick.’ (laughs) And Susan Molinari, I’m wondering how could he say that?      MOLINARI: Well- you know, times change- (both Molinari and Roberts laugh) politics change, and the situation changed. The situation in Arizona, as he explained it- you know, changed, and the President- you know, by his lawsuit in Arizona, I think really kind of raised the ante. Look, John McCain is a smart politician, and he didn’t do what a lot of other politicians did, which is to assume that, because he was the party nominee for president, that he didn’t have to work hard. And he had sort of the gift which we always think is- you know, a terrible thing of a later primary, to see that some of his incumbent colleagues and others in the House might have taken their election and their reelection in primaries for granted. And so- you know, he ran a smart race. He spent a lot of money, and he did what he needs to do to, presumably, return to the United States Senate. ROBERTS: But John Avlon, it’s almost classic John McCain, where he says, ‘I never said I was a maverick,’ and then you play the audio tape, and you say, ‘Well, with all due respect, Senator, I think you did.’ AVLON: Yeah. No, that’s just a dumb thing for him to have said, (Roberts laughs) and it’s sort of indefensible, because it’s such a core part of his identify, not just one imposed upon him, but one he accepted. And it’s dumb, because this was- this was actually a great year for someone to stress their independence- for someone to stress- the John McCain who the American people have come to know and respect, somebody who was standing up against fiscal irresponsibility when Republicans were spending like drunken sailors. He stood up against his own party. That should be a message that’s perfect for this year, and perfect for the Tea Party. The fact that he was independent should be a strength, but being primaried from the right, people kept saying that maverick was code for independent. So we’ve got to get some clarity right now. The Tea Party folks who say that the number one issue is spending- John McCain should be always a hero to them, and the fact that he’s considered a RINO by some speaks to the sickness in our politics and a problem in the Republican Party right now. ROBERTS: One more quick comment from you, and then we’ve got to go to John King, Lisa. He doesn’t really have to- if John McCain wins the primary, he doesn’t have to worry about the general election. I think he won with 75 percent last time. CAPUTO: Likely not, but what he has to worry about is what’s the public perception of John McCain? ROBERTS: Yeah- CAPUTO: What’s his legacy? Which John McCain are we talking about? Are we talking about the maverick, or are we talking about the Reagan Republican? Who are we talking about? During two July 2009 appearances, Avlon picked “wingnuts of the week” from the right and the left, and was much more critical of his right-wing selections . He also labeled CPAC 2010’s “saving freedom” theme as “a little extreme” during two segments on February 18 and 19 .

Read more:
CNN: GOP ‘Very Far to the Right’; Guest Laments McCain’s Rightward Lean

MRC Study: Media Blackout of Supreme Court ‘Battle’

When President Obama picked Elena Kagan to replace Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the broadcast networks referred to the upcoming Senate confirmation process as “contentious” a “meat grinder” and a “battle,” warning Kagan was “in for a fight.” But a Media Research Center analysis of the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts in the six weeks since Kagan was nominated shows the broadcast networks have failed to cover the “fight,” and have ignored most of the controversies that could lead to suspenseful hearings next week. MRC analysts found that the broadcast network evening newscasts aired just eleven stories about Kagan since her May 10 nomination (six on CBS, three on ABC and two on NBC), plus another three brief items read by the anchor. All but one of those stories appeared during the first week after Kagan’s selection; only the CBS Evening News , in a June 3 report, has bothered to cover any of the thousands of pages of Kagan documents released in recent weeks. Both CNN and FNC provided substantially more coverage of Kagan during their 6pm ET news programs (10 full stories on CNN’s The Situation Room , 11 on FNC’s Special Report ) and offered in-depth coverage of Kagan controversies that the broadcast networks glossed over. The NBC Nightly News hasn’t mentioned Kagan since she met with senators on May 12; ABC’s World News hasn’t said a word about Kagan since May 16. For its part, the CBS Evening News aired one item on Kagan on June 3 aimed at bolstering the nominee against complaints from the Left that she isn’t liberal enough: CBS’s JAN CRAWFORD: Elena Kagan has kept her cards so close to the vest that some on the left have worried she’s too moderate….But documents buried in Thurgood Marshall’s papers in the Library of Congress show that, as a young lawyer, Kagan stood shoulder to shoulder with the liberal left, including on the most controversial issue Supreme Court nominees ever confront: abortion. Crawford did acknowledge Kagan’s overt liberalism might wind up hurting her nomination: “While that may encourage liberals, it’s going to give Republicans a lot more ammunition to fight against her.” But neither CBS nor the other broadcast networks offered a follow-up, even as thousands of documents from Kagan’s stint in the Clinton White House were revealed. Networks Trumpeted Opposition to Roberts and Alito The networks’ disinterested approach to this year’s Supreme Court “battle” is at odds with how they covered the run-up to the hearings of the last two Republican nominees, when ABC, CBS and NBC all ran multiple stories in the weeks before each set of hearings began. On the July 26, 2005 World News Tonight , one week after President Bush picked John Roberts to replace Justice O’Connor, ABC correspondent (and future Obama spokeswoman) Linda Douglass highlighted Democratic demands for additional documents: “Democrats want Roberts’ more recent memos when he was crafting legal opinions for the first Bush administration. Republicans complain the Democrats are simply searching for reasons to oppose him.” The August 4, 2005 CBS Evening News amplified the Left’s criticisms of Roberts, including a soundbite from “Alliance for Justice” chief Nan Aron, who hysterically claimed material released up to that point “raises red flags about his commitment to civil rights, women’s rights, laws that have been in place for decades.” On November 14, 2005, nearly two weeks after Sam Alito’s selection, all three networks jumped on the release of a memo on abortion Alito had written twenty years earlier. NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams breathlessly wondered, “Is it a bombshell?” Reporter Williams conveyed liberal activists’ ire: “Women’s rights groups today pounced on the document, calling it proof that Judge Alito would restrict access to abortion” This time around, these same networks have failed to grant as much as a soundbite to any representative of a conservative group to talk about Kagan over the past six weeks. And the networks have aired no stories conveying GOP complaints about the need for additional Kagan documents from the National Archives or Clinton library. As for controversies, both CNN and the Fox News Channel have offered detailed reports about topics that the broadcast networks have either ignored or downplayed: ■ Kagan’s Princeton papers: CNN and FNC discussed Kagan’s senior thesis on the demise of the Socialist Party in the early 1900s, which she labeled “sad.” FNC’s Shannon Bream and CNN’s Lisa Sylvester both included soundbites from experts suggesting, in the words of Sylvester, that “it’s hard to conclude she herself is a socialist, more of a historian documenting a political movement.” But only FNC’s Bream noted Kagan’s op-ed for The Daily Princetonian , where she openly described herself a “liberal” and wailed about the “anonymous but moral majority-backed avengers of innocent life.” Bream added how “Kagan also said she looked forward to a time when a, quote, ‘more leftist left will once again come to the fore.’” ABC, CBS and NBC coverage of Kagan’s Princeton writings? Zero. ■ Openness to Regulating Political Speech: Both CNN and FNC explored Kagan’s handling of the Citizens United case as Solicitor General. Even though Kagan lost the 5-4 decision, the President had cited that case as an example of her commitment to fighting “special interests seeking to spend unlimited money to influence our elections.” On Special Report , Fox correspondent Major Garrett included a quote from Citizen United’s David Bossie saying Kagan offered “a fundamentally flawed view of the First Amendment, and I think it disqualifies her from the high court.” But CNN’s Kate Bolduan stuck to a positive recounting of Kagan’s style, saying her oral argument showed “she is light on her feet,” “clearly an intellectual” with “quick wit and personality.” As for the networks, ABC’s Jake Tapper and CBS’s Jan Crawford on May 10 made passing references to the case, but none of the broadcast networks explored the details of that case or suggested Kagan’s legal arguments showed a hostility to free speech. ■ Kagan’s ban on military recruitment. As Dean of the Harvard Law School, Kagan blocked the U.S. military from using the school’s Office of Career Services because of the ban on open homosexuals serving in the armed forces, a policy Kagan said she “abhorred.” CNN’s Lisa Sylvester offered an in-depth story on May 11, followed by a debate between Lawrence Korb from the liberal Center for American Progress and conservative Frank Gaffney. FNC offered its own story on May 11, quoting two conservative critics of Kagan vs. White House chief of staff David Axelrod and a gay veteran who supported Kagan’s stance. As for the broadcast networks, ABC and NBC limited themselves to a couple of sentences referencing the controversy on the day Kagan was picked. CBS also mentioned the matter on  May 10, with additional coverage on the May 16 Evening News . Reporter Jan Crawford’s tone was sympathetic: “Kagan, like many law school officials, opposed having military recruiters on campus….” In the past, when liberal organizations chose to do “battle” with a Republican appointee to the Court, the networks chronicled the effort and showcased the complaints of left-wing groups. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, these same networks seem decidedly uncurious about the confirmation “fight” over Elena Kagan.

See the article here:
MRC Study: Media Blackout of Supreme Court ‘Battle’

CNN’s Soledad O’Brien Sympathizes With Lesbian Teen’s Plight

On Monday’s Campbell Brown program, CNN’s Soledad O’Brien presented a one-sided report about a lesbian teenager in Mississippi whose senior portrait was left out of her school’s yearbook because she chose to have it taken in a tux, defying the school’s rules. O’Brien commiserated with the teen, asking her at one point, “I want people to understand because other people will say- oh, for God’s sake, it’s just a picture. So explain to us, what does it feel like to not be where you’re supposed to be?” Anchor John Roberts introduced the special correspondent’s near the end of the 8 pm Eastern hour by trying to make a tenuous connection between the report and the continuing major news of the Gulf oil leak: “All eyes are on Gulfport, Mississippi this morning as the President arrived for the first leg of his three-state tour, but about 150 miles north of the Gulf, in a small town called Wesson, the big news this season was all about the high school yearbook. It was here that a teenager’s senior picture triggered an unexpected backlash, and sparked outrage throughout the state.” O’Brien sympathized with Ceara Sturgis, the teen from Wesson, Mississippi, from the start of her report: “For 18-year-old senior Ceara Sturgis, her high school yearbook is more than a collection of memories. It’s about her struggle to be who she is in tiny Wesson, Mississippi, population about 2,000.” After asking the lesbian to describe herself (“18 years old and I’m gay. I don’t like people to push me around, especially when I have the right, and I don’t give up.”), the correspondent continued that “what she didn’t give up on was her fight to get this picture in her yearbook, a picture she took wearing a tuxedo instead of the traditional dress, called a drape.” Later, O’Brien got the closest to providing the other side when she provided quotes from the Wesson high school principal and the district office administrator. But she also let Sturgis and her mother cast the principal in a negative light: O’BRIEN: Principal Ronald Greer refused to print the picture of Ceara in a tux in the yearbook. Neither the principal nor the school’s superintendent would talk with us. After repeated calls, the district office administrator told us- quote, ‘We are done.’ Back in October, the principal told the Jackson TV station, he wasn’t able to comment- quote, ‘on that particular situation.’ Ceara and her mom believe the main reason the photo was vetoed- Principal Greer’s attitude towards homosexuality . The CNN special correspondent got the most sympathetic towards toward the Mississippi teen near the end of her report: O’BRIEN: Shortly after prom, Ceara got her copy of the yearbook. Her portrait wasn’t in it. O’BRIEN (on-camera): Where would you be? STURGIS: Between there and there. O’BRIEN: So you should be like right here. STURGIS: Yeah. I figured that if we kept fighting for a little bit, they would just end up changing their mind because I didn’t think it was a big deal. O’BRIEN: What did it feel like to not be there? STURGIS: It made me sad. O’BRIEN: Well, tell me. STURGIS: It made me feel bad. O’BRIEN: I’m not trying to make you feel bad. But I want people to understand because other people will say- oh, for God’s sake, it’s just a picture. So explain to us, what does it feel like to not be where you’re supposed to be? STURGIS: (crying) It’s not fair. O’BRIEN: Why is it not fair? STURGIS: I don’t know- okay, let’s say we put it in the yearbook, would anyone hurt like I hurt since I’m not in the yearbook? It wouldn’t hurt anyone. O’BRIEN (voice-over): She’s thinking about suing. It won’t put her picture in Wesson’s 2010 yearbook, but she says it may help other gay kids in Mississippi. STURGIS: All right, now just do a serious face. O’BRIEN: And at this point, that’s what Ceara’s thinking about. Reporting, in America, Soledad O’Brien, CNN, Wesson, Mississippi. Roberts hinted that O’Brien had another report on a homosexual teen in the works after her report finished: “And later this week, Ceara’s story inspires another Mississippi teen to stand up and speak out. We’ll have her story.” The anchor also promoted the correspondent’s upcoming one-sided special report ‘Gary and Tony Have a Baby,’ which she recently previewed for homosexual activist group GLAAD . CNN found it fitting to spend an entire four-minute-plus report to this lesbian teen’s plight, but when pro-life activist James Pouillon was murdered in September 2009, the network devoted only one anchor brief to the story: “A shooting spree near Flint, Michigan, leaves two dead. A local anti- abortion activist was killed in a drive by shooting this morning while protesting in front of Owosso High School. The gunman then drove to a local business where he shot and killed the owner. Police arrested a 33-year-old suspect who they say planned to kill a third man.”

Read the rest here:
CNN’s Soledad O’Brien Sympathizes With Lesbian Teen’s Plight