The sympathetic news media is avoiding mentioning his name, instead they are blaming the lack of a football intro for the massive collapse in ratings Sunday night for President Barack Obama’s appearance on CBS’ 60 Minutes. Americans turned away from watching Obama even though he was being interviewed about the nation’s new war on ISIS.
For example, Deadline Hollywood didn’t even mention Obama’s 60 Minutes interview when reporting on the drop in viewers.
“With no football lead-in, CBS’ Sunday lineup fell from last week. As expected, the drop was steepest at 7 PM, with 60 Minutes (1.1) off by 69% from last Sunday, when it directly followed the game.”
Also, Variety avoided mentioning Obama on 60 Minutes.
“At CBS, “60 Minutes” (1.1/4 in 18-49, 9.2 million viewers overall) dropped off sharply from last week when it had the end of the Denver-Seattle football game as a lead-in, and was also down about 20% from last year.”
The Los Angeles Times likewise did not name Obama.
“”60 Minutes” didn’t fare as well. With a rating of 1.1 in the key demo, the show was down 69% from last week’s season premiere. About 9.1 million people tuned in.”
Neither did Broadcasting and Cable:
“Newsmagazine 60 Minutes drew a 1.1, down sharply from last week, when it received a big lead-in from football overruns”
“On CBS, 60 Minutes scored a 1.1, down 69 percent from last week’ s NFL boosted 3.5 adults 18-49 rating.”
“CBS took fourth place in ratings with a 1.3/4 and third in total viewers with 10.7 million. “60 Minutes” at 7 posted a 1.1/4 with 9.2 million total viewers, while the freshman drama “Madam Secretary” the following hour dropped off 30 percent from last week’s series premiere, posting a 1.4/4 with 12.7 million total viewers.”
Last week CBS sent out a press release bragging on 60 Minutes’ ratings, as reported by the Futon Critic.
There appears to be no reports of 60 Minutes bragging about the ratings for Obama’s 60 Minutes show.
A gold star goes to Hal Boedeker at the Orlando Sentinel for apparently being the only reporter to mentioned Obama in reporting on 60 Minutes’ ratings however he did not mention the huge ratings drop.
“And “60 Minutes” had 9.2 million for an interview with President Barack Obama.”
Change Obama to Bush and one can imagine how the media would have been reporting the 60 Minutes ratings collapse: Americans Tune out Bush as He Drags U.S. in Another War.
Our system of government was designed with a redundancy of checks and balances. In recent years, Democrats have charged Republicans with supposed obstruction and have maintained that their unwillingness to rubber-stamp the president’s agenda is, somehow, an anti-American concept when, in reality, blocking bad ideas from becoming law is a tremendously American idea upon which our system of government relies.
Similarly, across the country, there have been battles in state legislatures as one party battles another. Recently, Missouri passed legislation that would allow schools to train teachers in the use of firearms and allow such teachers to defend students from a would-be attacker.
The legislation, SB 656, was vetoed by Democrat Governor Jay Nixon. With regards to his veto, Nixon stated, “Arming teachers will not make our schools safer. I have supported and will continue to support the use of duly authorized law enforcement officers employed as school resource officers, but I cannot condone putting firearms in the hands of educators who should be focused on teaching our kids.”
What’s amazing is that every time a “bad guy with a gun” seeks to create carnage, the defenseless are forced to run, hide and cower and pray that a trained “good guy with a gun” makes it to the scene in time to save their life. What this legislation accomplishes is exactly that plus offering the added benefit of a deterrent effect.
I ask: how many would-be shooters would be willing to wage an assault on a school knowing that there are trained, armed teachers everywhere? This legislation will save lives.
However, our representative democracy prevailed as this week, Missouri’s House and Senate voted to override the governor’s veto and the legislation is set to become law.
The House voted to overrule the governor 117 to 39 and the Senate voted to overrule Nixon 23 to 8.
SB 656 doesn’t just arm teachers, but makes adjustments to current laws concerning concealed carrying of firearms. It disallows public housing authorities to infringe upon “a lessee or a member of the lessee’s immediate household or guest [to] personally [possess] firearms.”
It further augments the places in which open and concealed carry is lawful and even lowers the concealed permit requirements from 21 years of age to 19. It also prohibits healthcare professionals from inquiring about a patient’s firearm ownership.
This is a tremendous step in the right direction and an affirmation of our American values. More guns in the hands of responsible citizens has been the only tried-and-true method of lowering violent crime and the right to carry and use firearms in defense of oneself or another is a right that must be recognized and supported.
The anti-Second Amendment crowd is sure to hate this development, but for those who love freedom and have a clear understanding of our rights as Americans should rejoice at the news of this victory that is relatively undiscussed within the leftstream media.
Last we checked on Gov. Scott Walker, he was (a) knotted in the polls with his Democratic challenger, and (b) fending off mind-bendingly dishonest media coverage of the scurrilous investigation into Wisconsin conservative groups – which has been summarily thrown out of court by two different judges. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals took up the ‘Joe Doe’ circus yesterday, as twice-thwarted prosecutors sought to have their secret probe reinstated; lawyers for the Wisconsin Club for Growth, one of the targeted organizations, argued that a scathing lower court ruling shutting down the investigation and exposing the prosecutors to misconduct lawsuits ought to be be upheld. A press account of Tuesday’s oral arguments said the judges, “repeatedly quizzed lawyers… why the federal courts should weigh in on a state investigation” at all. Leading up to the proceedings, former FEC official Hans Von Spakovsky penned an op/ed in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel spelling out what’s at stake in the case:
The fact that such a secret persecution of citizen advocacy organizations even occurred ought to be an embarrassment to a state that prides itself on being a progressive bastion of individual freedom. It is more reminiscent of a banana republic than the world’s foremost democracy… The [conservative] group’s supposed “crime” was coordinating its efforts on public policy issues with elected officials such as Gov. Scott Walker and with other conservative advocacy organizations. This resulted in SWAT-like raids in the middle of the night by armed law enforcement officials to seize “evidence,” as if these organizations were dangerous drug cartels or mob operations. Last week, I joined three other former members of the Federal Election Commission in filing an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief for the organizations unfairly targeted.
Based on our extensive experience interpreting federal campaign finance law, we argue that issue advocacy is at the core of our rights to free speech, to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The right of citizens and their membership associations to directly engage elected leaders is all the more important on politically charged questions of public policy. Such collaboration is the norm in the political arena, where there is extensive interaction between citizens groups and elected officials about proposed legislation. In fact, such coordination is vital to a functioning democracy… I hope that the civil rights lawsuit filed against these prosecutors is successful and results in a large judgment that deters this type of investigation from ever happening again.
As we await the panel’s ruling – which is expected before the upcoming elections – a new report from respected journalist and Brookings senior fellow Stuart Taylor, Jr. sheds fresh light on the possible motivations behind the whole imbroglio. According to a source described as a former prosecutor with firsthand knowledge of the investigation’s inner workings, Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisolm’s efforts have been driven by intense partisanship. The source says Chisolm’s wife is a fanatical anti-Walker agitator, and assesses the entire inquiry as a vindictive political crusade:
A longtime Chisholm subordinate reveals for the first time in this article that the district attorney may have had personal motivations for his investigation. Chisholm told him and others that Chisholm’s wife, Colleen, a teacher’s union shop steward at St. Francis high school, a public school near Milwaukee, had been repeatedly moved to tears by Walker’s anti-union policies in 2011, according to the former staff prosecutor in Chisholm’s office. Chisholm said in the presence of the former prosecutor that his wife “frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding and the effect it would have on the people involved… She took it personally.” Citing fear of retaliation, the former prosecutor declined to be identified and has not previously talked to reporters. Chisholm added, according to that prosecutor, that “he felt that it was his personal duty to stop Walker from treating people like this.” Chisholm was referring to Gov. Walker’s proposal – passed by the legislature in March 2011 – to require public employee unions to contribute to their retirement and health-care plans for the first time and limited unions’ ability to bargain for non-wage benefits.
This former Chisolm associate goes on to allege that the culture within his office was about as far removed from the paradigm of impartial law enforcement as could be imagined:
Chisholm said his wife had joined teachers union demonstrations against Walker, said the former prosecutor. The 2011 political storm over public unions was unlike any previously seen in Wisconsin…Chisholm’s private displays of partisan animus stunned the former prosecutor. “I admired him [Chisholm] greatly up until this whole thing started,” the former prosecutor said. “But once this whole matter came up, it was surprising how almost hyper-partisan he became… It was amazing… to see this complete change.” The culture in the Milwaukee district attorney’s office was stoutly Democratic, the former prosecutor said, and become more so during Gov. Walker’s battle with the unions. Chisholm “had almost like an anti-Walker cabal of people in his office who were just fanatical about union activities and unionizing. And a lot of them went up and protested. They hung those blue fists on their office walls [to show solidarity with union protestors] …At the same time, if you had some opposing viewpoints that you wished to express, it was absolutely not allowed.”
Read Taylor’s whole story, which traces the history of the ‘John Doe’ campaign finance probe and describes the pair of lower court decisions that lowered the boom on overzealous prosecutors. Not one person has been charged throughout the ordeal (let alone indicted or convicted), and prosecutors admit that Walker hasn’t even been served with a single subpoena. Meanwhile, conservatives in Wisconsin say the groundless, never-ending, punitive, secret investigation has frozen them into a state of paralysis, which they argue is a clear violation of their rights. President Obama’s former White House counsel appears to agree:
Bob Bauer, one of the nation’s leading election law experts, counters that however valid the reformers’ concerns may be, the Wisconsin investigation raises important constitutional and policy issues. “There are serious problems with the effort to prohibit or limit issue ad coordination,” Bauer said. “I’m very wary of using the criminal law to enforce them.” Punishing coordination, Bauer said, would “drive apart natural allies who should be free to collaborate on common political goals.” …Since Bauer served as President Obama’s White House Counsel, he cannot be discounted as a conservative partisan.
This is only the latest skirmish in the Left’s apparent campaign to criminalize political disagreement – ranging from a proposed Constitutional amendment restricting political speech, to an endless ‘Bridgegate’-to-nowhere investigation in New Jersey, to the utterly preposterous indictments against Texas Gov. Rick Perry. If these tactics prove successful, what’s to stop agenda-driven prosecutors in heavily partisan jurisdictions from routinely cooking up criminal inquiries and charges for the sole purpose of hanging a dark cloud over a rival politician during an election season? By the time the target has time to clear his or her name, the political damage has been done. The attack ads already aired. The people already voted (see: Stevens, Ted and DeLay, Tom). Genuine public corruption is a scourge that must be rooted out, but abusing the legal system to harass and silence ideological opponents is disgraceful. I’ll leave you with one of Walker’s latest ads touting Wisconsin’s job growth, followed by an RGA hit on Mary Burke:
Democrats are now seizing on new projections of a future structural deficit – estimated to emerge between 2015 and 2017 – to pummel Walker. These gripes come from the same people who left Wisconsin drowning in a $3.6 billion sea of red ink, which Walker has mopped up by reducing spending and reforming the budget, all while lowering taxes across the board. A Republican member of the state’s Joint Finance Committee offers a six-point primer on what Democrats won’t mention as they fulminate about potential structural deficits, which they suddenly care about very deeply. His first point: Walker and the Republican legislature have produced a string balanced budgets, leading to a sizable surplus and a robust rainy day fund. These latest projections employ a static analysis that assumes no efforts will be undertaken to adapt, respond, and achieve balance.
Citing “numerous complaints about voter applications” submitted by the Democrat-aligned New Georgia Project, Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp “is investigating allegations of forged voter registration applications and demanding records from a voter registration group with ties to one of the state’s highest ranking Democrats”.
A subpoena was sent to the New Georgia Project and its parent organization Third Sector Development on Tuesday. The organization is a project of the nonprofit organization Third Sector Development, which was founded and is led by House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams.
Kemp sent a memo to county elections officials claiming that a preliminary investigation “revealed significant illegal activities’ including forged voter registration applications, forged signatures on releases, and applications with false or inaccurate information.”
A spokesman confirmed Kemp’s office was contacted by officials in DeKalb, Gwinnett, Henry, Bartow, Butts and Muscogee counties.
“We’re just not going to put up with fraud. I mean, we have zero tolerance for that in Georgia so we’ve opened an investigation and served some subpoenas,” Kemp told Channel 2 political reporter Lori Geary.
“At the end of the day this is not going to be about politics. This is about potential fraud which we think happened.”
The IRS says it has lost emails from five more workers who are part of congressional investigations into the treatment of conservative groups that applied for tax exempt status.
The tax agency said in June that it could not locate an untold number of emails to and from Lois Lerner, who headed the IRS division that processes applications for tax-exempt status. The revelation set off a new round of investigations and congressional hearings.
On Friday, the IRS said it has also lost emails from five other employees related to the probe, including two agents who worked in a Cincinnati office processing applications for tax-exempt status.
The agency blamed computer crashes for the lost emails. In a statement, the IRS said it found no evidence that anyone deliberately destroyed evidence.
Two thousand rules and regulations passed by the Obama administration are illegal, according to an article in the Washington Post.
Most federal rules and regulations must be reported to Congress and more than 2,000 of Obama administration rules have not been reported. Since 2012, he has simply implemented the regulations without Congress and without telling Congress.
The author of the WaPo article, a staunch left-wing Democrat, Juliet Eilperin, who is pictured below, wrote this: “The situation illustrates the obscure, byzantine process used to create federal regulations – and how easily it can go awry.”
Ms. Eilperin refers to it as “technically illegal” but it is “actually illegal.”
Obama is completely lawless and Congress has yet to be heard from on this issue.