Tag Archives: Obama

Sir Paul Compares Global Warming Skeptics to Holocaust Deniers – Says of Obama, "I Really Love Him"

Seems the only thing gushing more than the BP oil spill these days is the disaster brewing in Paul McCartney’s mouth.  In an exclusive interview with The Sun , McCartney takes a major swipe at global warming realists, er, deniers, by stating (emphasis mine): “Sadly we need disasters like this to show people. Some people don’t believe in climate warming – like those who don’t believe there was a Holocaust.” Well that’s putting things in perspective.  I’m not sure global warming has been proven to have caused the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion.  Missed that report.  Regardless, it remains unclear how the theory of global warming is in any way similar to the reality of the Holocaust. McCartney goes on to defend President Obama from any and all criticism concerning the Gulf disaster, culminating with the revelation that he “really love(s) him.” Because nobody was really sure where your allegiances lied after the ‘library’ swipe at former President Bush, Paul. McCartney starts with a blanket dismissal of the Obama critics: “I don’t accept the criticism of Barack over the oil spill.” He continues, “If the President of the country you spilled oil in tells you off then you’ve just got to take it or say, ‘I’m really sorry, we’ll clean it up and pay for it all by next week.” Now I ask, why didn’t BP think of that in the first place?  All of these failed attempts and confusion in trying to ‘plug the damn hole’, and all Tony Hayward had to do to make things right was say, “I’m really sorry, we’ll clean it up and pay for it all by next week.” Of his recent visit to the White House, McCartney recalls, “It was such an honour. I’d heard of the prize – it’s the biggest for popular music in the US. When the President gave it to me, I was so touched. I’m a huge Obama supporter. I really love him.” He also gushes, “I think Obama’s doing great. He’s a smart guy.” I’m not sure what it is, but McCartney is clearly smitten with our ‘smart guy’ President.  Perhaps it was his spelling of the University of ‘Sycacuse’ .  Perhaps it was his over-estimation of a tornado death toll by roughly 9,988.  Maybe it was his firm grasp of geography .  Or his love of Sioux City . No word on whether it was true that Sir Paul went on to say, “He had me at 57 states .” Based on these comments it is clear that, as The Sun interview states, McCartney has been spending too much time sitting in “a darkened room lit only by scented candles … to gather his thoughts.” Clearly the gathering isn’t working.  To be fair though, even the Dutch skimmers would have a tough time reigning in those thoughts. – Send comments or tips to rustyweiss@verizon.net . Please join me on Facebook.   Photo Credit:  AFP/Getty

The rest is here:
Sir Paul Compares Global Warming Skeptics to Holocaust Deniers – Says of Obama, "I Really Love Him"

MRC-TV: The June 24 ‘Media Mash’ on Hannity

“The media, for like five seconds, those with thrill up and down their legs, they were a little critical of the Anointed One and what was one of the worst speeches in the Oval Office… but as soon as he fired McChrystal and hired Petraeus, they went nuts,” Sean Hannity observed last night at the beginning of his recurring “Media Mash” segment with NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell. The Fox News host then rolled a montage compiled by Media Research Center (MRC) analyst Kyle Drennen which showed the mainstream media hailing Obama as “brilliant” for the personnel move. After the montage, Bozell noted that the same media that proclaimed Obama sacking McChrystal as “brilliant” were claiming that the president really had no choice but to fire the Afghanistan commander. “If he had no choice, then it really wasn’t really altogether all that brilliant,” the MRC president observed. Bozell and Hannity also discussed  the media’s double standard in bashing BP CEO Tony Hayward — who had been relieved of duty for overseeing the cleanup operation — for yachting over the weekend, while ignoring President Obama’s weekend golfing excursion and MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski admitting she was parroting White House talking points to defend the administration’s handling of the ongoing crisis. For the full MP3 audio of the “Media Mash” segment, click here . For video click here for the WMV file or watch the video embed above.

Go here to see the original:
MRC-TV: The June 24 ‘Media Mash’ on Hannity

WaPo’s Stevens-Arroyo Calls for Catholics to ‘Embrace a Redistribution of Wealth’

The Washington Post’s really should consider renaming Anthony Stevens-Arroyo’s column in its “On Faith” blog. “Catholic America” should be “Liberal Democrat Catholic America,” just for the sake of truth in advertising. On June 23, left-wing hack Stevens-Arroyo again injected his politics into the ostensibly religious column. In “ Common good v corp. profits ,” he actually wrote that Catholics should “embrace a redistribution of wealth.” The column sought to explain how Catholics and others should view Judge Martin Feldman’s ruling overturning the Obama moratorium on off-shore drilling. Why, the reader may ask, should this event have Catholic significance, beyond the fact that a liberal writer whose column has “Catholic” in the title was upset about it? It doesn’t. But Stevens-Arroyo gamely offered that, “There may not be a ‘Catholic’ position about the immediate politics of off-shore drilling, but there is an on-going Catholic approach to resolving the competing interests.” Not surprisingly, that approach vindicates the left. To Stevens-Arroyo, the issue came down to “common good,” which led him to make this puzzling statement: “While we have considerable freedom about our personal political choices in the application of principles, Catholics in America are bound to embrace a redistribution of wealth, even if it goes contrary to ranting from groups like the Tea Party or Wall Street.” He never explained where exactly it states Catholics are bound to encourage the government to confiscate legally earned private property to give it to whomever it deems more worthy. Catholics are bound to assist others through charity, not compulsory redistribution. This isn’t the first time Stevens-Arroyo has conflated socialism with faith. Last year he declared that “ the most Catholic ” part of Ted Kennedy’s funeral was the senator’s grandchildren pleading for nationalized health care. But, not content being an arbiter of what is Catholic and what isn’t, Stevens-Arroyo set himself up as a law scholar, hypothesizing that the “Reagan-appointed judge” Feldman’s ruling could be seen as the work of an “activist court.” He ranted that, “a judge is supposed to be limited to matters of constitutionality — and not to impose his jobs’ policy. There can be no doubt that a presidential moratorium falls within the powers of the White House, so stopping this legitimate executive order on questions about its consequences constitutes activism.” Even the Associated Press explained that the moratorium was overturned because the “Interior Department failed to provide adequate reasoning for the moratorium.” Stevens-Arroyo has a history of being unable to hide his liberal viewpoints. Just last March he claimed that Fox New’s Glenn Beck was using “the same strategy of the Hitler Youth and the Polish Communist Party … ” In December he also attempted to compare Ft. Hood shooter Hidal Hassan to World War 1 hero Alvin York and General Patton.

See the original post:
WaPo’s Stevens-Arroyo Calls for Catholics to ‘Embrace a Redistribution of Wealth’

FNC’s O’Reilly Cites NewsBusters Video of Media Praising Obama’s ‘Brilliance’

At the top of Thursday’s O’Reilly Factor on FNC, host Bill O’Reilly cited a NewsBusters video montage of various media figures touting President Obama’s “brilliant” handling of the General McChrystal controversy: “[Obama] has a very powerful ally, the American media. After the President fired General McChrystal yesterday, NewsBusters.org put together this montage of press reaction.” O’Reilly played the video as part of his Talking Points Memo opening the show. After it finished, he joked: “So I guess the firing of McChrystal was a brilliant move.” He then noted how “…we could have played that montage with another 30 seconds with different reporters echoing the same theme.” Minutes later, O’Reilly asked radio host Laura Ingraham about the media all singing from the same hymnal: “When you hear the mainstream media, brilliant, it was brilliant, it was brilliant, it was brilliant.” Ingraham interjected: “It was hilarious.” O’Reilly replied: “Isn’t it? I mean, how far down in the tank does the American people – the American media have to go, before the people just say enough.” Ingraham concluded: “Well, it shows you Bill, how totally out of touch all these media figures – and that montage, I was screaming in the studio here, it was so funny to hear – but it’s so out of touch with the way regular people think.” Ingraham continued: “Most people are saying, okay, what they’re doing on the economy isn’t working. What they’re doing in Afghanistan, we’re losing confidence. We love our troops, we want them to win. But we’re not getting why this is working. And they’re losing confidence across the board in the way this administration is operating. And meanwhile, putting in Petraeus, who obviously is a hero, is ‘Oh, well, that’s brilliant. That’s decisive.’ Later, O’Reilly spoke with liberal Columbia University Professor Marc Lamont Hill about the same topic and declared: “He [Obama] had to do it. But it wasn’t brilliant. It was like he had to do it. And these clowns are going ‘it was a brilliant move.’ What do you think?” Even Hill admitted: “Brilliant was pushing it.” O’Reilly grilled Hill on the left-wing media slant: “…you watch these guys in the mainstream media supposed, you know, objective reporters. You know it’s a farce.” Hill again admitted: “I’ll agree the response last night was clearly a left-leaning analysis.” O’Reilly later observed: “But traditionally, the media in this country are cynical and they’re distrustful of people in power, and they’re looking to get you, and then you go on and ‘he so brilliant.'” On Wednesday night, radio host Mark Levin also cited the NewsBusters item on his show and similarly mocked the media reaction. Here is a full transcript of O’Reilly’s June 24 Talking Points Memo: 8:00AM TEASE BILL O’REILLY: The O’Reilly Factor is on. Tonight: CHIP REID: It sounds like a pretty brilliant decision. WOLF BLITZER: A very brilliant move. CHUCK TODD: It’s going to be seen as a brilliant choice by the President. O’REILLY: The mainstream media senses President Obama may be going down so they are propping him up. We will have opinions on that from Laura Ingraham and Marc Lamont Hill. 8:01AM SEGMENT O’REILLY: Hi, I’m Bill O’Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight. President Obama on the descent. That is the subject of this evening’s Talking Points Memo. As we reported last night, this week is the low point for the Obama administration. And today, a new Wall Street Journal poll confirms what we said yesterday. For the first time in that poll, more Americans think President Obama is doing a bad job than a good job. 48% Disprove, 45% say he’s doing okay. But the really bad news for the President is that 62% of Americans now feel the country’s heading in the wrong direction. That is the highest number since before the presidential election of 2008. Talking Points believes it is the chaos factor that is damaging the Obama administration, once again. The economy, shaky. The oil spill, chaos. The Afghan war, not going well. And the border situation is so bad the state of Arizona is now defying the federal government. Add it all up and you are in the chaos zone. No president can survive there. Jimmy Carter, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon were all done in by the perception they could not control the country. That is where the President is right now. But he has a very powerful ally, the American media. After the President fired General McChrystal yesterday, NewsBusters.org put together this montage of press reaction: CHIP REID: Sounds like a pretty brilliant decision, really. JIM MIKLASZEWSKI: This is nothing less than a stunning development, Brian. And quite frankly, at a quick glance, almost brilliant. CHUCK TODD: Politically, in this town, it’s going to be seen as a brilliant choice by the President. WOLF BLITZER: A very brilliant move to tap General Petraeus. DAVID GREGORY: I think he took swift and decisive action. I think that’s how it’s going to be read. O’REILLY: So I guess the firing of McChrystal was a brilliant move. By the way, we could have played that montage with another 30 seconds with different reporters echoing the same theme. Like life, politics is not fair. President Obama didn’t cause the oil spill, he did not encourage General McChrystal to make indiscreet comments, he inherited a very bad economy, but has not been able to turn it around. For a guy like the President, who is ultra confident, this must be a frustrating time. His policies simply aren’t working. And if the war in Afghanistan and the economy get any worse, he will go the way of Jimmy Carter. Fair-minded Americans bear no malice towards Mr. Obama. Just as President Bush was treated unfairly at times, so has the President been. But the truth is, America is now in the chaos zone. And November is coming up fast. And that’s the memo.

Read the original here:
FNC’s O’Reilly Cites NewsBusters Video of Media Praising Obama’s ‘Brilliance’

MoveOn.org Removes ‘General Betray Us’ Ad From Website

In a classic example of liberal hypocrisy, the far-left leaning, George Soros-funded group MoveOn.org has removed its controversial “General Betray Us” ad from its website. For those that have forgotten, shortly after General David Petraeus issued his report to Congress in September 2007 concerning the condition of the war in Iraq and the success of that March’s troop surge, MoveOn placed a full-page ad in the New York Times with the headline, “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” This created quite a firestorm with media outlets on both sides of the aisle circling the wagons to either defend or berate both the Times and MoveOn. Now that President Obama has appointed Petraeus to replace the outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the war effort in Afghanistan, the folks on the far-left that castigated Petraeus when he worked for George W. Bush have to sing a different tune. With that in mind, the ad , which has been at MoveOn’s website for years, was unceremoniously removed on Wednesday as reported by our friends at Weasel Zippers: It was there the last time Google cache took a screen shot of it (June 18th), so it was scrubbed sometime between then and today. If you try the link now (http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.htm) it goes to MoveOn’s default page.  I guess MoveOn couldn’t possibly bash this General now that he’s working for Obama. To give readers an idea of the firestorm this created at the time, here are some NewsBusters articles published after this ad hit: CBS and NBC Morning Shows Ignore Dem Embarrassment Over MoveOn Ad Parroting MoveOn, Matthews Accuses Bush of ‘Betrayal’   Keith Olbermann Coined General ‘Betray Us’ Not MoveOn Senator Hatch Lashes Out at MoveOn and ‘Nutroots’ MRC’s Bozell Slams NYT’s MoveOn.org ‘Betray Us’ Ad Discount NYT Shares Plunge While It Deeply Discounts MoveOn’s Ad Space NYT-MoveOn.org’s ‘Petraeus — Betray Us’ Ad Cited NYT’s Own Reporting Wrongly NYT Rejected Advocacy Ads Like MoveOn’s From Conservative Groups How Will Media Report Senate Vote Condemning MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad? Michael Kinsley Defends MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad Senate Condemnation of MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad Receives Mixed Coverage NYT’s Public Editor Says Paper Made Mistake Running MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad Russert Lets Hillary Off Hook Concerning MoveOn’s ‘Betray Us’ Ad New York Times Admits Discount Rate for Moveon.Org (Blogosphere Roundup) NYT Confesses: Mistake to Grant MoveOn.org Deep Discount With Petraeus now part of the Obama administration, it’s going to be fascinating watching all of the media members and outlets that supported MoveOn’s ad now backtrack and gush over the General they once despised.   Stay tuned. 

Read the original post:
MoveOn.org Removes ‘General Betray Us’ Ad From Website

Hopeydopeyontheropey: Confidence Waning in Obama

A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows that American voters sure are looking for change – from Obama: Sixty-two percent of adults in the survey feel the country is on the wrong track, the highest level since before the 2008 election. Just one-third think the economy will get better over the next year, a 7-point drop from a month ago and the low point of Mr. Obama's tenure. Amid anxiety over the nation's course, support for Mr. Obama and other incumbents is eroding. For the first time, more people disapprove of Mr. Obama's job performance than approve. And 57% of voters would prefer to elect a new person to Congress than re-elect their local representatives, the highest share in 18 years. …Some 30% in the poll said they ‘do not really relate’ to Mr. Obama. Only 8% said that at the beginning of his presidency. Fewer than half give him positive marks when asked if he is ‘honest and straightforward.'’ And 49% rate him positively when asked if he has ‘strong leadership qualities,'’ down from 70% when Mr. Obama took office and a drop of 8 points since January. Just 40% rate him positively on his ‘ability to handle a crisis,’ an 11-point drop since January. Half disapprove of Mr. Obama's handling of the oil spill, including one in four Democrats. …'The results show ‘a really ugly mood and an unhappy electorate,’ said Democratic pollster Peter Hart, who conducts the Journal/NBC poll with GOP pollster Bill McInturff. 'The voters, I think, are just looking for change, and that means bad news for incumbents and in particular for the Democrats.' Yup, it’s that hopeychangey thingy, I guess. http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/6102139/hopeydopeyontheropey.thtml added by: crystalman

Jon Stewart: Media ‘Kind of Suck’ for Getting Scooped by Rolling Stone

Comedian Jon Stewart Wednesday pointed out an inconvenient truth about this week’s General Stanley McChrystal incident: the media “kind of suck” for getting scooped by Rolling Stone magazine. As “The Daily Show” host addressed the day’s events involving the General and President Obama, he showed clips of various press members expressing disgust that Rolling Stone would get such access to McChrystal and staff. These included CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper as well as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. After the final clip of CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr asking, “What on earth was he thinking giving an interview to Rolling Stone,” Stewart quipped, “At approximately 11:04 Eastern Standard Time, the American news media finally realized they kind of suck” (video follows with more highlights and commentary): Stewart next showed some real investigative reporting at CNN: Rick Sanchez talking about his kids having a party in his basement. The Comedy Central star derided, “I’m not sure the unfiltered, over the top musings of the Commanding General undermining the now nine year mission in Afghanistan is quite analogous to your kids hanging out in the basement lighting farts.” No, but it does tell us the state of today’s television news media. As NewsBusters has been reporting since its inception, there isn’t a lot of real investigative journalism going on in our nation anymore, especially if it could be harmful to Democrats. Traditional media were totally scooped by the National Enquirer concerning former Sen. John Edwards’ affair. Just this week news outlets were also bested by the Enquirer’s report concerning former Vice President Al Gore making unwanted sexual advances on a masseuse in 2006. As it pertains to Obama, NewsBusters has chronicled for years stories the mainstream media ignored during the campaign and since his inauguration that would have been embarrassing as well as politically damaging to him and his administration. As such, it shouldn’t be at all surprising to anyone that a news outlet outside the mainstream logged this report concerning McChrystal, as most Americans have known for quite some time the media “kind of suck.” 

Read more here:
Jon Stewart: Media ‘Kind of Suck’ for Getting Scooped by Rolling Stone

Ed Schultz Tries to Blame McChrystal, Appointed by Obama, on Bush

Far-left MSNBC ranter Ed Schultz just can’t let facts get in the way of his rank partisanship and liberal propagandizing. His latest whopper, that Gen. Stanley McChrystal was “another problem [President Obama] inherited from the Bush administration,” was blatantly untrue, and just earned him a ” pants on fire ” rating from Politifact.com. Politifact, which has busted up other untruths propagated by media liberals, noted a valuable lesson for liberals and Democrats: “not everything can be blamed on President Bush.” Indeed. Not only did President Obama not “inherit” McChrystal’s command from the previous administration, he “effectively sacked the general in charge to create a vacancy that he then proceeded to fill with McChrystal as his fix-it man,” notes Politifact. We applaud the folks at Politifact for checking Schultz’s inane rantings. Welcome to our world!

More here:
Ed Schultz Tries to Blame McChrystal, Appointed by Obama, on Bush

Did Ed Schultz’s Construction Company Get Stimulus Money?

While defending the Obama administration as a champion for small business owners, MSNBC host Ed Schultz revealed that his construction company more than doubled its number of employees in the past year – thanks to the stimulus bill. “We’ve gone from eight employees to twenty employees in the past year, because of the stimulus package,” he said of his construction company. “We’ve put some people back to work. There is some growth.” Schultz made that revelation as a guest on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” Wednesday morning. In a segment of the show where he was discussing corporations shipping jobs overseas and skimping on benefits to regular workers and labor union members, Schultz stepped up and defended President Obama. “This President, and this administration, has done more for small business than any other President has in the last thirty years,” he claimed. “There’s more tax incentives on the table right now, there’s more incentives for small businesses to go out and do things, to hire – we never saw this under any other President.” Schultz whined that tax incentives for big corporations hurt the American middle class by providing opportunities for them to send jobs overseas. He credited President Obama with providing opportunities for small businesses to thrive in the United States. However, Schultz also lamented that certain Obama administration policies, such as increasing taxes on foreign earnings, ending secret ballots in union elections, EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses and restrictions on oil are “pro-corporate and anti-worker.” With corporations attacking labor, cutting wages, and going after pensions, Schultz claimed that age discrimination is taking place in the business world, and that “we’ve now developed this culture that it’s not good to pay anybody.”         The transcript of the segment, which aired on June 23 at 9:30 a.m. EDT, is as follows: ED SCHULTZ: Now we’re at a crossroads in this country. We have to make a determination if we believe that having 10 percent unemployment for a long period of time is the direction that we want to go. Do we understand that the social pressure and the economic pressure that that’s going to put on the country? I don’t think that’s where Americans want to go. And I think that we’re going to see a real surge of buy American, a loyalty to American products, because I think the middle class folks in this country have seen exactly what has happened, this attack on labor that has taken place, that all of a sudden it’s okay to reduce wages, or attack people’s pensions. And we’re also seeing in this country right now age discrimination. Because there’s a race to the bottom line. We’ve now developed this culture that it’s not good to pay anybody. And we have to have somewhat of a push for economic patriotism, in reinvestment in people. We have to understand that people make the difference. And if we don’t value that at every level, we’re not going to be the country that we can be. We’re not going to be the country that we were at one time. We still can achieve greatness, but we gotta get the big money out of politics, we’ve gotta get what is destroying the middle class in this country, and reinvigorate this country with breaks for the middle class, and a real focus on job creation. And I think the President’s trying to do that, but — of course the way the Congress is right now, all the bickering that’s going on, and there’s really no bipartisanship to speak of that addresses any of this — I think we’re in for a long struggle here, a real long struggle. (…) HOST: Mr. Schultz, the Wall Street Journal echoes that caller’s sentiment. They have a headline that echoes the caller’s sentiment that business groups say the Obama administration is hostile toward jobs. And they have a list of grievances: Increased taxes on foreign earnings, stalled free trade agreements, shareholder rights to nominate directors, end to secret ballots in union elections, expanded damages for pay discrimination, EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses, and restrictions on oil. ED SCHULTZ: Those were all pro-corporate, and anti-worker. This President, and this administration, has done more for small business than any other President has in the last thirty years. There’s more tax incentives on the table right now, there’s more incentives for small businesses to go out and do things, to hire – we never saw this under any other President. He’s doing anything he possibly can. But the money is tight. The money is very tight. And until we loosen up the lending practices in this country, we’re not going to have – and until small businesses have access to capital, we’re not going to see this turn around. The President is doing everything he possibly can. In fact, the Republicans aren’t even matching him on any of this stuff. They think it’s all about the corporations and all about the top two percent. In the book, I document – and I want this lady to read this book, and come back and tell me if I’m wrong. The number of foreign countries that are operating in this country that don’t pay tax – does she think that’s a good thing? Is it a good thing for corporations not to pay their fair share? Now I’m not here to say that all corporations are bad. They do hire people. But they’ve also shipped a lot of jobs overseas, because we have set the table for them to do that with tax incentives that have come back to hurt the great American middle class which built this country. So when does the little guy get a break? Now I’m a small businessman. I have my own broadcast company, and I also have a construction company. I can tell you about all the things that you have to put together to make a construction company work. We’ve gone from eight employees to twenty employees in the past year, because of the stimulus package. We’ve put some people back to work. There is some growth. There’s incentives on the table for my employees. And so, you know, I don’t have to do this. I could just go fishing at the lake. But we’ve got to have some type of leadership at every level of the economy, and those who have lived the good life, and those who have had the fortune of making a few dollars to put it back into the kids, to put it back into the youth of the country, to care about the infrastructure again. And I don’t see corporations doing that. I see them caring about the foreign countries and getting cheap labor. Well you know what cheap labor’s going to do? Cheap labor’s going to take this country down. And the disposable income is starting to rot away for Americans.   

Read the original here:
Did Ed Schultz’s Construction Company Get Stimulus Money?

Media-Backed Obama Mortgage Program Flops

Obama’s home loan modification program was talked up by the bailout-friendly news media as a potential “ray of light” for struggling homeowners. But on June 21, Associated Press reported the mortgage assistance program is “falling flat.” The broadcast networks supported the mortgage modification and housing bailout when Obama launched it in 2009, after criticizing Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s plan for not doing “enough” to fix the problem. ABC, CBS and NBC haven’t mentioned the new figures since AP reported them. “More than a third of the 1.24 million borrowers who have enrolled in the $75 billion mortgage modification program have dropped out,” AP said. “That exceeds the number of people who have managed to have their loan payments reduced to help them keep their homes.” The ” ambitious ” Home Affordable Modification Program was supposed to help 3-4 million people. As of last month the number of dropouts (436,000) exceeded the permanent modifications by almost 100,000 (340,000). This was part of the same housing bailout Rick Santelli condemned on CNBC saying “the government is promoting bad behavior.” Santelli’s rant against the housing bailout helped inspire thousands of Americans to protest bailouts and runaway government spending at Tea Parties around the country in 2009 and 2010. But Santelli’s opposition to a bailout was an exception among the pro-bailout news media. As recently as Feb. 18, 2010 ABC’s Robin Roberts was praising the program as “what may be a ray of light for the millions of homeowners struggling to hold on to their piece of the American dream.” Roberts and Bianna Golodryga downplayed problems saying that there had been “hiccups” in the program, but placed the blame for those problems on banks unwilling to work with homeowners, rather than on the government. Golodryga’s report also included an expert who criticized the program from the left saying it was “nowhere near the size and scope of what we need to, to stem this tide.” Golodryga is engaged to White House budget director Peter Orszag , who announced his resignation June 22, 2010. ABC’s Jeffrey Kofman also found left-wing criticism of the program to incorporate in his story. On Feb. 18, 2009, Kofman mentioned concerns “that a $75 billion bailout can’t single handedly turn around an $11 trillion housing market. But they say it is a start.” Roughly a month later, CNBC’s Diana Olick acknowledged that the $75 billion program had “fallen short” of helping the 3-4 million homeowners on “Nightly News” March 26, 2010. At that time, she reported that only 200,000 permanent modifications had been done. But Olick didn’t criticize the Obama administration’s decision to expand the plan to more borrowers. In 2009, when Obama’s two-part mortgage bailout was launched, CBS had no criticism or difficult questions in its “Early Show” segment March 5. The night before, Katie Couric described the plan as “relief for struggling homeowners” on “Evening News.” Now it appears the bailout didn’t work and may jeopardize the economic recovery, according to CNBC’s Larry Kudlow. Kudlow reacted to the latest mortgage modifications data on June 22, saying that “Housing in particular looks vulnerable to that double-dip [recession]. And all these goofy, temporary tax credits and mortgage modifications and other forms of temporary stimulus nearly steal activity from the future and never work permanently, as Milton Friedman argued [years ago].” ‘Controversial’ Program Struggles, Despite Network Support Like other bailouts, the networks favored the mortgage bailout and loan modification program when it was announced in 2009. Now that the program is a failure don’t expect a retraction. So far the networks have ignored the new data Treasury released on June 21. Since the broadcast networks haven’t done much reporting on the problems with the loan modification program, people might wonder why it isn’t working. According to AP, “A major reason so many have fallen out of the program is the Obama administration initially pressured banks to sign up borrowers without insisting first on proof of their income. When banks later moved to collect the information, many troubled homeowners were disqualified or dropped out.” AP also warned that more foreclosures could be ahead as people leave the program. The Washington Post reported that about half of the program dropouts ” received another type of loan modification from their banks.” Only 7 percent have gone into foreclosure, according to CNNMoney.com. The timing of the news was bad for politicians trying to pass another housing bailout – this one $3 billion in loans for homeowners who are out of work. Politicians should be wary given the outrage already directed against mortgage bailouts, since it was the potential housing bailout that angered many and led to tea parties across the country. Santelli’s initial rant condemned the proposed housing bailout and touched a nerve with traders and America at large. “And in terms of modifications, I’ll tell you what, I have an idea. You know the new administration’s big on computers and technology,” Santelli declared . “How about this, (Mr.) President and new administration – Why don’t you put up a web site to have people vote on the Internet as a referendum to see if we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages, or would we like to, at least, buy cars and buy houses in foreclosure and give them to people who might have a chance to actually prosper down the road, and reward people that could carry the water, instead of drink(ing) the water.” After traders reacted with claps and cheers, CNBC’s Joe Kernen replied, “Rick, they’re like putty in your hands.” Santelli denied that and continued saying, “This is America! (turns around to address pit traders) How many of you people want to pay for your neighbors’ mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills? Raise their hand. (traders boo; Santelli turns around to face CNBC camera) President Obama, are you listening?” Networks Back Mortgage Rescues, or Complain They’re Not Big Enough Obama’s mortgage bailout was praised by the many in network news media, after an earlier mortgage rescue designed by former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was attacked from the left by the broadcast networks because it wouldn’t help ” enough people .” “It sounds as if it doesn’t help anybody who had their mortgage rate increased or got foreclosed in 2007,” ABC “World News” anchor Charles Gibson complained on Dec. 5, 2007. “CBS Evening News” sympathized with a Texas couple who “can’t afford” to keep their large ranch home (complete with horses), supposedly because of the rate increases on their mortgage. CBS also ignored skepticism of a homeowner bailout on April 2, 2008, arguing that since the government had bailed out banks, mortgage holders should get the same assistance. “Now to the foreclosure crisis that has so many Americans worried about losing their homes,” “Evening News” anchor Katie Couric said that night. “After the government helped rescue Bear Stearns, calls grew louder for Washington to help struggling homeowners as well. Today on Capitol Hill, there was at least the promise of some assistance.” In July 2008, ABC’s Golodryga called “a sweeping housing bailout bill” “good news for potential homeowners.”   The networks also endorsed the $700 billion “rescue” package in 2008 that was voted down by 228 representatives including 132 “rebellious” conservatives and 94 Democrats. Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., was one of those who voted against it because “The decision to give the federal government the ability to nationalize almost every bad mortgage in America interrupts a basic truth of our free market economy.” The list of reporters and anchors who championed the first bailout that failed and ultimately the bill that passed on Oct. 3, was long and included CBS’s Anthony Mason, ABC’s Betsy Stark, Bianna Golodryga and Jake Tapper, NBC’s Tom Brokaw and CNBC’s Jim Cramer all called for the government to be the knight in shining armor with taxpayer dollars. Cramer was interviewed repeatedly on NBC and CNBC and even appeared on rival network ABC during “Nightline.” It wasn’t just housing bailouts. ABC, CBS and NBC also promoted the nearly $800 billion stimulus bill. They campaigned for the biggest spending bill in history , picking pro-stimulus speakers more often than opposing speakers and almost completely failed to ask how the enormous bill would be paid for.