Tag Archives: Obama

What the Hell is the Murkowski Amendment?

The Murkowski amendment , which is currently heading to the Senate floor for a vote, is around one sentence long. It’s simple, and potentially devastating. It’s solely stated goal is overturning the endangerment finding filed by the EPA that ruled greenhouse gases are a harmful pollutant, and threaten public well-being. Which would both effectively stop the EPA from being able to clamp down on the nation’s heaviest greenhouse gas polluters and toss Obama’s new, highly touted national fuel economy standard into the trash heap… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Continued here:
What the Hell is the Murkowski Amendment?

iPhone 4 screen durability in question

The iPhone 4’s screen has been put through a durability test and the results don’t seem to match up with Apple’s claims about it. Take a look. added by: admillios

The 10 Most Caffeinated Diet Drinks

PEPSI MAX RULS ! 1st,……it lOOks like Obama owns it ( thats a good thing ) 2nd C A F F E I N E ! 3rd – blood sugar stability- “DIET” list – http://www.diet-blog.com/07/the_10_most_caffeinated_diet_drinks.php CAFFEINE ACHIEVER ! list- http://www.energyfiend.com/the-caffeine-database GO ! GO! GO ! You can never get started tooooooooooooooooooooooooo> FAST on the socially sanctioned gateway drug sources ! Remember,…..there is a METH O.D. to corporate marketing! added by: remanns

Media Reality Check: Team Obama’s Grubby Federal Job-Dangling Is Not News to ABC, CBS, and NBC

On February 18, Rep. Joe Sestak, a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania, revealed in a Philadelphia TV interview that the Obama White House offered him a job in an effort to talk him out of opposing Sen. Arlen Specter, who’d recently switched parties. Network interviewers asked the White House for comment, but the network news bosses at ABC, CBS, and NBC kept any mention of this possible quid pro quo off the airwaves of their morning and evening news programs for more than three months. Then ten days after Sestak defeated Specter, the White House issued a brief statement on the Friday afternoon heading into the Memorial Day weekend, claiming they asked former President Bill Clinton to offer Sestak an unpaid position on a presidential advisory board. That drew perfunctory reports on Friday night and some brief mentions over the holiday weekend. During the following week, the White House narrative fell apart, since Sestak could not serve on these advisory boards as a member of Congress. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs obfuscated and dodged reporters when peppered with questions, which led to some newspaper and cable coverage, but ABC, CBS and NBC all blacked out the story as it crumbled. Then Andrew Romanoff, a Democratic Senate candidate in Colorado, emerged with a similar story, complete with a White House e-mail he received that touted several positions in foreign aid programs he could have. This spurred two network morning show stories, but the networks weren’t acknowledging any kind of scandal was occurring. There’s now been 12 days of network silence on Team Obama’s Sestak maneuvering. Media Research Center analysts monitored all network morning and evening news coverage in 2010 on Sestak’s Senate campaign. The Sestak job-offer scandal drew only nine stories or mentions on the three networks. NBC offered only one evening anchor brief. CBS featured an evening anchor brief, a morning anchor brief, and a Saturday night interview where analyst John Dickerson dismissed the scandal. ABC did the most with five offerings: three stories or discussions on World News, and two on Good Morning America. All of these nine segments were contained within the Memorial Day weekend. It sounded odd for ABC’s Jonathan Karl to announce on May 28 that “after months of dodging questions,” Team Obama offered an answer. How would anyone watching just network news have any idea the story wasn’t brand new? The networks even failed to note developments on their own Sunday interview programs. On May 23, Sestak dodged questions on CBS’s Face the Nation and NBC’s Meet the Press, while ABC’s This Week ran a soundbite of the February interview with Sestak in Philadelphia. But none of the networks aired a second of the Sestak story until the following Friday night. Only ABC reported a full story that Friday evening. On CBS, anchor Katie Couric offered only a 30-second brushoff. Couric’s sense of its news value was summed up seconds later when she followed that with a light story about frogs: “Thousands of them have been disrupting traffic along a busy highway in northern Greece for days now. And why did the frogs cross the road? To get to the food on the other side.” NBC anchor Brian Williams offered a 73-second anchor brief with a no-news-here tone: “The story got out back in February, and the White House, as the President pledged yesterday, set the record straight today.” Williams signaled his lack of interest by putting that story after a two-minute obituary for ‘80s child star Gary Coleman. That was the only time NBC’s morning and evening newscasts have touched the story, even as MSNBC star Chris Matthews declared the whole Clinton-offer story “a big case of bluffing and BS.” ABC offered the most follow-up, offering a story on Saturday’s Good Morning America and a question to Jake Tapper on Sunday’s morning show. They also threw Tapper a Sestak question on Saturday’s World News, and a Sestak question to ABC political analyst Rick Klein on Sunday night’s newscast. CBS added a few touches over the Memorial Day weekend as well. CBS threw in an anchor brief on Saturday’s Early Show and a couple of questions on Saturday’s Evening News to political analyst John Dickerson, who insisted Democrats saw nothing wrong and Republicans “don’t own the leverage of power to actually force an investigation, so it might just die there.” Especially if the networks want it to die there. The only time CBS offered a full report came on The Early Show on June 3, when White House correspondent Chip Reid reported on the Andrew Romanoff case. ABC mentioned Romanoff briefly on its morning show, but NBC never did. None of the three evening news shows have touched the Romanoff story at all. The networks cannot plausibly claim that this job-dangling is not a news story because it’s a commonly sleazy practice – not after years of claiming the choice of Obama was so idealistic and inspiring. Their inaction not only ignores Obama’s yellowed promises to be transparent and accountable, but also Joe Sestak’s new pledge on the night he defeated Specter that “accountability has been missing for far too long, and I want to help bring it back.”

See the article here:
Media Reality Check: Team Obama’s Grubby Federal Job-Dangling Is Not News to ABC, CBS, and NBC

Did Politico Inadvertently Reveal Too Much Detail About Cynical Democrat Sales Pitch for Amnesty?

Illegal aliens. Eeek! I said the forbidden term. For the past few years the “preferable” but less accurate term to describe that group has been “illegal immigrants.” Even that modified term has been too harsh for advocates of amnesty who prefer the completely inaccurate term, “undocumented workers.” However, in order to cynically sell the public on amnesty, the Democrats are willing to temporarily swallow their pride and use “illegal immigrants” according to a Politico article written by Carrie Budoff Brown who reveals a lot more cynicism on the part of the Democrats than she probably intended: Long pilloried for being soft on illegal immigration, top Democratic officials have concluded there’s only one way they can hope to pass a comprehensive immigration bill: Talk more like Republicans. They’re seizing on the work of top Democratic Party operatives who, after a legislative defeat in 2007, launched a multiyear polling project to craft an enforcement-first, law-and-order, limited-compassion pitch that now defines the party’s approach to the issue. The 12 million people who unlawfully reside the country? Call them “illegal immigrants,” not “undocumented workers,” the pollsters say. I’m sure Ms Brown just wanted to demonstrate how “smart” the Democrats have become on the amnesty issue but in that attempt she has also revealed an incredible level of cynicism on their part. Here is more of Brown revealing how the Democrats are attempting to fool the public through the cynical use of nice sounding words: Strip out the empathy, too. Democrats used to offer immigrants “an earned path to citizenship” so hardworking people trying to support their families could “come out of the shadows.” To voters, that sounded like a gift, the operatives concluded.  Now, Democrats emphasize that it’s “unacceptable” to allow 12 million people to live in America illegally and that the government must “require” them to register and “get right with the law.” That means three things: “Obey our laws, learn our language and pay our taxes” — or face deportation.  Right about now I can almost hear Democrat officials hissing to each other about how Brown was way too upfront in revealing their attempt to sell the amnesty snake oil to the public. And now Brown names names: President Barack Obama uses the buzzwords. So does the congressional leadership. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), author of the Democratic immigration plan, scolds advocates who refer to illegal immigrants as “undocumented workers.”  “Buzzwords.” Which means the folks who use them like Obama and Schumer are also amnesty snake oil salesmen. Thanks for that revelation, Carrie. However even these meaningless snake oil buzzwords are a bit too much for some of the liberals to swallow such as amnesty advocate Frank Sharry: Even then, the poll-tested words and phrases will only go so far if Democrats fail to exert discipline and unify behind the get-tough message. And at this point, not all immigration reform advocates have bought into the rhetorical hard line, which aims squarely at winning the political center. Even Sharry, who spearheaded the effort, declines the advice of pollsters to excise “undocumented workers” from his lexicon, saying it feels too much like it plays into conservative efforts to “dehumanize” immigrants. Of course, what article about the cynical manipulation of emotions via buzzwords would be complete without the input of the logic-denying Democrat advisor, Drew Westen ? “When [voters] hear ‘undocumented worker,’ they hear a liberal euphemism, it sounds to them like liberal code,” said Drew Westen, a political consultant who has helped Sharry hone the message through dial testing. “I am often joking with leaders of progressive organizations and members of Congress, ‘If the language appears fine to you, it is probably best not to use it. You are an activist, and by definition, you are out of the mainstream.’” Have you noticed how Democrats have begun mouthing words in support of border security before amnesty can be considered? All a poll driven act according to Brown’s revelation: …Podesta and Sharry assembled a roster of boldfaced Democratic pollsters — Stan Greenberg, Celinda Lake, Guy Molyneux — to figure out how the party would ever get away from one of the most devastating GOP lines of attack, that a comprehensive immigration plan amounted to “amnesty” for illegals. The results made Greenberg a convert. His surveys of swing districts in 2006 and 2007 concluded that Democrats took a political risk by discussing immigration. Greenberg thought frustration with immigrants would spawn an environment similar to the welfare backlash in the 1990s and that Democrats needed to get tough on border security before talking about citizenship.   But polling that Greenberg, Lake and Molyneux conducted in 2008 proved to Greenberg that Democrats could talk in a way that won over voters. It needed to sound tough and pragmatic, but not overly punitive, the pollsters said. The message beat the amnesty charge in their polling. Got that? The call for border security is just a poll driven act on the part of the Democrats?   More poll driven pretension: The most significant shift in language involves the path to citizenship. Pollsters determined that Democrats sounded as though they wanted to reward illegal immigrants , even though lawmakers almost always laid out that requirements and delays that would precede citizenship. “It comes back to this idea: We give permission; we set the terms; it’s under our control; and if you meet those conditions, you are us, welcome to America,” Westen said of the new frame . The “new frame” i.e. the “new act.”   So thank you, Carrie Budoff Brown, for revealing the incredible level of “fool the public” cynicism on the part of the Democrats on the issue of amnesty. It was probably unintentional on your part to reveal so much but thanks anyway.

Read more here:
Did Politico Inadvertently Reveal Too Much Detail About Cynical Democrat Sales Pitch for Amnesty?

Pelosi Slams BP for ‘Lack of Integrity’

On Thursday, as President Barack Obama was preparing to meet with the families of the 11 people killed in the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was ripping into BP for its sketchy business practices as she talked to reporters at a White House press conference.

Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter Pouts that Obama Has to Clean Up Bush’s Mess

Jonathan Alter of Newsweek once again blamed Bush and the Republicans for creating the mess that Obama is now cleaning up, preventing the President from accomplishing his agendas. Alter, appearing Wednesday on MSNBC’s “The Daily Rundown,” called the BP oil spill crisis “the perfect metaphor” for Obama’s presidency so far. “It’s been cleaning up a lot of the messes left to him by his predecessors,” he stated. Alter added that Obama is trying to stop an economic depression “that, you know, began to happen on George Bush’s watch.” “It is a distraction from Obama’s own agenda,” Alter added about the oil spill, “and in that sense, it irritates him.” Not to be outdone, MSNBC anchor Savannah Guthrie chimed in, affirming that the word of the day was “frustration.” “You mentioned frustration, and that’s really the word,” Guthrie opined. “Because you do get the feeling that the President, and certainly his lieutenants over there at the White House, really resent this Washington game that requires the President to emote for public consumption.” As Newsbusters reported Tuesday, Alter has sounded the same criticisms on other cable networks. Appearing on Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report Monday, he claimed that Obama had to run “the shovel brigade” at the beginning of his presidential term. “A shovel brigade,” he eloquently explained, “you know, the guys who sweep up after the elephants when the elephants leave their (expletive) all over the circus, right?” As a guest on the Joy Behar Show on HLN that same night, Alter said that Obama is “frustrated,” and is “cleaning up Bush’s messes,” namely Wall Street, the war in Afghanistan, the auto industry mess, and now the BP oil spill crisis. Describing his encounters with President Obama and his Cabinet  inside the White House during his first term, Alter said that “we were all living history. This man prevented another Great Depression.” The transcript of the June 9 segment of The Daily Rundown, which aired at 9:39am EDT, is as follows: CHUCK TODD: You know, watching him deal with a crisis–this is the first big test–what did you learn about him in year one that you sit there and say, ‘Boy, the lesson he learned from this he’s applying to the oil spill’? JOHNATHAN ALTER, NEWSWEEK: Well first of all, the oil spill is the perfect metaphor for Obama’s presidency so far. It’s been cleaning up a lot of the messes left to him by his predecessors, whether it was bank bailouts, auto bailouts, Afghanistan–which turned out to be a much bigger mess than anybody anticipated–preventing a depression that, you know, began to happen on George Bush’s watch. So this is more of the same, and I think they put it in that category, and in that sense, even though they’ve been much more focused on it from the beginning than I think a lot of the public realizes, it is a distraction from Obama’s own agenda–things like health care, education, that he wants to do that are not so-called ‘legacy issues’ for him. And in that sense, it irritates him. You know, you know that he–he’s very disciplined, very focused, does his homework, is on the case, but it’s not what he wants to be dealing with. And I think it’s part of the reality of being president is that you have to deal with the cards that you’re dealt. And that frustrates him. And then I think the other big problem for him in this is that he’s terrific behind closed doors–that’s what I try to do in The Promise, is I try to take you into what he’s like behind closed doors–at stripping out emotion from any of his calculations, right? And that gives him a higher batting average on decisions, if you make them rationally. But he fails to put emotion back into the equation for the public parts of his job. And that’s where he’s struggling on this oil spill. SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: You mentioned frustration, and that’s really the word. Because you do get the feeling that the President, and certainly his lieutenants over there at the White House, really resent this Washington game that requires the president to emote for public consumption. I mean, they really resent everything about Washington that’s expected of them. Just the way the President hates the idea of having to do a sound byte.

See more here:
Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter Pouts that Obama Has to Clean Up Bush’s Mess

Newt Gingrich, Carpetbagger For God, Made a Movie About the Pope

Not the current pope, alas, who could actually use some conservative hagiographical spin right about now, but the previous pope — John Paul II, whose efforts to combat totalitarianism through faith are chronicled in the Gingrich-produced documentary Nine Days That Changed the World . The former House Speaker and Georgia Republican has traveled with the film to the late pope’s homeland of Poland, where he spoke Wednesday of the political change that Catholicism can effect under Communist regimes in Cuba and China. And, one can only presume, in America, where the film will make the university rounds this fall just in time to combat the Obama-flavored socialist scourge jockeying for public office. Hold it just a second, Newt — I thought you were a Baptist ?

Go here to see the original:
Newt Gingrich, Carpetbagger For God, Made a Movie About the Pope

Rabbi That Filmed Helen Thomas’s Anti-Semitism Gets 25,000 Hate Emails

It’s not just members of the media standing up to support disgraced journalist Helen Thomas after her unscheduled retirement caused by anti-Semitic remarks she made  on camera last week. The rabbi that caught her disgusting comments on videotape and put them on the Internet has received 25,000 hate-email messages – and counting. Hours after MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann actually called Rabbi David Nesenoff one of his “Worst Persons in the World,” CBS-TV in New York reported the vicious electronic attacks streaming into the rabbi’s inbox like a “ticker tape” (video follows with partial transcript, h/t HotAirPundit ): ROB MORRISON, CBS2 NEW YORK: Four days ago Long Island Rabbi David Nesenoff launched his new website with these now-infamous comments from legendary journalist Helen Thomas. MORRISON: The veteran newswoman apologized and then retired. Since then, Rabbi Nesenoff says the hate mail has been pouring in.  RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: As we’re talking here, right now, the emails on my email are like a ticker tape. It’s been this way for a week. It’s going, going, going.  MORRISON: 25,000 and counting — messages like:  “The Jews need to go home just like the filthy illegals that plague America, same (expletive).”  “I know your type you gentile hating Jew boy. Come and face me turd. I’ll smash u under my boot.”  “Hitler was right. Time for you to go back in the oven.”  Most of the senders not even bothering to hide their email addresses.  NESENOFF: These are people that feel very mainstream about anti-Semitism and hate. They feel so proud of it. There is an arrogance about it. There is no shame. There certainly isn’t, nor is there any shame from media members likely missing what the real story is here: rampant anti-Semitism in America and how it goes largely over-looked by our press. In this instance, so-called journalists in their zeal to support Thomas are even defending it. By contrast, any incident of possible racism towards minorities will get great attention by the affirmative action supporting press. Take for example the CNN.com report Wednesday that blamed white people for President Obama’s pathetic response to the Gulf Coast oil spill. Since Obama threw his name into the ring as a presidential candidate back in February 2007, his adoring press have tried to bring race into the discussion whenever possible.  Consider how quickly the Cambridge police department was labeled racist during last July’s Henry Louis Gates Jr. episode. Media then conveniently called it a “teachable moment” about race relations in this country. So why isn’t the nation’s longest living member of the White House press corps making disgustingly anti-Semitic remarks to a rabbi a “teachable moment?” Far from it, as NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell noted Tuesday, “[T]he only soundbites came from sympathetic media colleagues, wishing her well.” So what did Americans learn from THIS moment? If you’re a journalist that makes an anti-Semitic remark, your colleagues will support you. Isn’t that a nice lesson as anti-Semitic acts of violence around the world continue to rise? Or hadn’t you heard that such attacks more than doubled last year? Oh. That’s right. You couldn’t have known that, for our media chose NOT to report it .  Wasn’t that convenient?  Add it all up, and just as our press exploit real or imagined racism to advance their agenda ESPECIALLY if it can help an elected official they support, anti-Semitic acts are not only regularly ignored but also excused if need be. Why this is still the case 65 years after the few surviving Jews were liberated from Nazi death camps after World War II is truly astounding. 

Originally posted here:
Rabbi That Filmed Helen Thomas’s Anti-Semitism Gets 25,000 Hate Emails

Media Fail to See Obama’s Fingerprints on Lack of Press Freedom in Gulf

Watch CBS News Videos Online It’s been more than 50 days since a BP oil rig exploded off the coast of Louisiana, beginning a massive leak of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Miles of beaches have been soiled and birds, turtles and other sea creatures have died. But the most disturbing pictures of the disaster weren’t available to the public for more than 40 days. That was when many people finally witnessed Louisiana’s state bird, the brown pelican, literally covered in thick brown oil. Why so long? Because federal agencies including the Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) were preventing the press from reaching many areas affected by the disaster. CBS, Associated Press, Mother Jones and The Times-Picayune have all complained about local and federal authorities and and British Petroleum contractors inhibiting their reporting. But while many in the news media blame BP, the real culprit may well be the Obama administration. When asked, Obama and other administration spokespeople say the U.S. government is in charge of the oil spill cleanup. The president has openly stated that the federal government is in charge of the oil spill clean up. The Associated Press (AP) reported that “Obama says all steps BP takes to end the huge spill must be approved in advance by the government.” But journalists and the left have blamed BP rather than point fingers up the federal chain of command. Left-wing magazine Mother Jones called it a “corporate blockade at Louisiana’s crude-covered beaches.” Newsweek magazine pointed out the difficulty that photographers encountered when trying to “document the slow-motion disaster in the Gulf.” In its article, Newsweek placed the blame squarely on British Petroleum from the headline: “BP’s Photo Blockade of the Gulf Oil Spill” to the quote from a Louisiana photographer who said the prefix “BP” ought to be attached to “Coast Guard” on all the vessels. “It’s a running joke among the journalists covering the story that the words ‘Coast Guard’ affixed to any vehicle, vessel, or plane should be prefixed with ‘BP,'” Charlie Varley told Newsweek. “It would be funny if it were not so serious.” It’s also not funny that many in the news media and on the left would rather blame BP for controlling federal agencies like the U.S. Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) than recognize the similarities between limited media access in the Gulf and Obama’s previous actions controlling the press. Obama also has a long-standing pattern of handling the press, sometimes to the point of blocking access. So now that many reporters are complaining of a lack of access to the oil spill, it is surprising how little blame has been directed at the administration. During the campaign, he had three reporters from publications that had endorsed John McCain kicked off his plane. Since then he has openly attacked his detractors (including Rush Limbaugh) and was once criticized by a couple reporters (Chip Reid and Helen Thomas) for managing a town hall meeting. As of February, Obama had held fewer solo press conferences than most presidents — only George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon held fewer. And he went nearly a year, from July 22, 2009 until last week, without holding a formal news conference. Despite the failures of regulators at the Minerals Management Service and Obama’s own claim that the feds are in charge, a Media Research Center analysis of the oil spill coverage found 95 percent of stories had no criticism of the Obama administration whatsoever (148 out of 157 stories). Coast Guard, FAA keeps press away from Gulf spill Even though Newsweek, Mother Jones and others have clearly blamed BP for controlling federal agencies, government officials themselves are the ones that have been turning the news media away. So far, reporters and photographers from many outlets, including CBS, the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Mother Jones and AP have publicly complained about being denied access by local governments and law enforcement, the Coast Guard and the FAA. “More than a month into the disaster, a host of anecdotal evidence is emerging from reporters, photographers, and TV crews in which BP and Coast Guard officials explicitly target members of the media, restricting and denying them access to oil-covered beaches, staging areas for clean-up efforts and even flyovers,” Newsweek wrote. CBS released video of a boat of BP contractors and two Coast Guard officials telling their reporters to leave an area on May 20. The video shows one man on the boat saying, “This is BP’s rules, not ours.” As a company, how could they exert authority over the Coast Guard, and why wouldn’t the Obama administration make sure that does not happen?  AP’s Matthew Brown was one of the few to attach some blame to government, not solely BP. Brown wrote that different media organizations were being restricted “though not all have linked the decision to BP. Government officials say restrictions are needed to protect wildlife and ensure safe air traffic.” While there was no mention of Obama in Brown’s story, Brown said the Coast Guard and FAA told him that “BP PLC was not controlling access.” It is the FAA that has imposed air space restrictions on miles of coastline, according to The Times-Picayune. Flights in certain areas cannot descend below 3,000 feet – effectively preventing aerial photography of the spill’s impact. Rhonda Panepinto, owner of Southern Seaplane charter service, told the New Orleans paper her husband was told ” absolutely no media or press on any planes. The press flights are limited to Saturdays only and only in Coast Guard helicopters.” According to The Times-Picayune, the government decides who can fly and who cannot: “the FAA maintains that BP employees or contractors are not calling the shots on who gets to fly into the restricted air space, saying those decisions are made by the FAA and Coast Guard. But agency spokespeople acknowledge that media access is limited, saying they are only allowing flights into the restricted area that are directly related to the disaster response.” A June 9 New York Times story from cited an incident where the Dept. of Homeland Security told Sen. Bill Nelson’s, D-Fla., that no journalists would be allowed to accompany him on a gulf trip on a Coast Guard vessel. Though the Times clearly blamed some government agencies, like DHS, it did not mention the Obama administration at all. Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser condemned the federal response to the oil spill calling for Coast Guard admiral Thad Allen to resign . Nungesser also called on Obama to support Gov. Bobby Jindal’s EPA request for dredging permits to protect Louisiana. On May 28, ABC’s Jake Tapper reported that Nungesser had a private meeting with Obama. Nungesser said Obama “chewed me out” and said “we need to communicate.” “You pick up the phone and call the White House. And, if you can’t get me on the phone, then you can go blast me,” Obama reportedly said to Nungesser. The Coast Guard has defended itself, specifically regarding the CBS incident, by saying that the media do have access: “In fact, media has been actively embedded and allowed to cover response efforts since this response began, with more than 400 embeds aboard boats and aircraft to date.” That wasn’t sufficient for Ralph Ranalli, chief blogger for WGBH’s Beat the Press website. He chalked up the continued access problems up to ” cluelessness ” on the part of the Obama administration, but criticized the lame response from the Coast Guard. Ranalli said that the CBS clip should have “shamed” the Obama administration into making “a rational plan for media access.” “Embeds are fine in a war zone. But for the federal government to say the media should be satisfied with ride-alongs with an oil company under criminal investigation for the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history is insane. It just staggers the imagination,” Ranalli wrote. Newsweek also took issue with such embeds arguing that “even when access is granted it’s done so under the strict oversight of BP and Coast Guard personnel.” Who’s really in charge? Media outlets have been determined to blame BP for the lack of access, despite the local and federal governments’ involvement. Unlike many reporters, one green blogger did call the president out on the Mother Nature Network. Karl Burkart, an architect and blogger about green technology, pointed out that “The Coast Guard, as one of the branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, answers to the commander in chief – President Obama.” Ultimately Burkart said he “believed” Obama was ” aiding and abetting ” BP. But the question remains, is the White House powerless to control federal agencies like the Coast Guard? Or unwilling – because more coverage would mean more potential criticism for Obama? Or are these agencies puppets in the hands of BP? No matter the option, things don’t look good for the administration. Robert Gibbs, WH press secretary, deflected criticism of the administration on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” May 23 saying “There’s no doubt that we have had some problems with BP’s lack of transparency.” But the White House has been careful to claim that they’ve been charge of the clean up operations. Carol Browner, Obama’s energy and climate czar, said on “Meet the Press” May 30, “the government’s been in control from the beginning … don’t make any mistake here, the government is in charge.” ( Watch video ) Obama told AP the same thing, saying that BP had to get permission from Washington for all the clean up. So it stands to reason that the White House wouldn’t have trouble telling BP to allow the media unfettered access to report on the oil spill if it wanted to. But the Obama administration has a history of managing the press. Despite an often-“fawning” news media that helped get him elected , the president rarely holds formal news conferences. According to Byron York, Obama has done fewer brief Q&A sessions than Bush or Clinton. Even at a bill signing for the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act May 18, Obama refused to answer questions from CBS’s Chip Reid. Reid asked, “”Speaking of press freedom, could you answer a couple of questions on BP?” Obama replied, “You’re certainly free to ask them, Chip.” When Reid pressed further asking, “Will you answer them?” Obama said flat-out: “We won’t be answering.” York said that former Bush White House press secretary Dana Perino was astounded by Obama dodging the press. “I think it is astonishing that there isn’t carping about this from the press every day,” Perino said. “Believe me, they would have nailed us to the wall.” Reid, along with liberal Helen Thomas, also challenged Obama for a “tightly controlled” town hall meeting in July 2009. “The concept of a town hall is to have an open public forum, and this sounds like a very tightly controlled audience and list of questions,” Reid said to Gibbs. “Why? Why do it that way?” Later in that White House briefing even liberal journalist Helen Thomas accused the administration of “a pattern of controlling the press.” During his presidential campaign, Obama kicked three reporters off the press airplane –  all from conservative papers. ABC wrote, “the papers are calling foul, claiming they were targeted for their editorial-page positions and kicked off while nonpolitical publications like Glamour and Jet magazines remained on board.” The Washington Times, New York Post and Dallas Morning News were eliminated from the airplane. Since taking office, the Obama White House has hit back hard at critics in the media, including Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge and CNBC’s Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer . According to Limbaugh, Obama has simply been following the liberal Saul Alinsky strategy: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Jonathan Martin of Politico agreed, saying on March 4 , all this isn’t coincidence; it is an effort to frame Limbaugh in the Alinsky mode. After Santelli’s rant about bailouts, Gibbs suggested that the CNBC floor reporter didn’t understand Obama’s mortgage plan. Gibbs also criticized Cramer and attempted to discredit him. But each of these actions by Obama, Emanuel or Gibbs has triggered a media-feeding frenzy and ensuing grassroots efforts to capitalize on the media attention and destroy the target. Like this article?  Sign up  for “The Balance Sheet,” BMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter.

View original post here:
Media Fail to See Obama’s Fingerprints on Lack of Press Freedom in Gulf