Friday News Roundup - Domestic
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-03-23/friday-news-roundup-domestic
President Obama traveled to Oklahoma urge expedited approval of the southern part of the Keystone XL pipeline; Rep. Paul Ryan released the GOP's 2013 budget plan, which passed the Committee by one vote; a top aide to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney compared his campaign to an "Etch-A-Sketch"; and the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI have opened an investigation into the "facts and circumstances" surrounding the killing of black teenager Trayvon Martin. David Corn of Mother Jones and MSNBC, Jeanne Cummings of Bloomberg News and Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post join Diane for analysis of the week's top national news stories.
Guests
David Corn
Washington bureau chief, "Mother Jones" magazine; author of the new book "Showdown: The Inside Story of How Obama Fought Back Against Boehner, Cantor, and the Tea Party."
Jeanne Cummings
deputy government editor, Bloomberg News.
Jennifer Rubin
"Right Turn" blogger for the Washington Post.
Related Items
Friday News Roundup Video
The panelists discuss the Trayvon Martin case and the larger national issues involving racism, self-defense laws, and more:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
'There is a difference on our paper between editorial and reported news." Jennifer Rubin
Jennifer just punctured the hot air balloon that is Mother Jones' chief manure spreader, Corn.
Oct 21 what is life like on your planet?
Quite nice this time of year on planet reality.
Diane's code for agreeing with a liberal caller/emailer opinion is to respond "interesting."
quoting meangreen
"There are many factors having to do with productivity like automation that reduced labor and this automation started around 1963."
You actually help make my point. From your baseline of 1963 until Reagan, everybody, blue-collar and white-collar collar workers, managers and top executives alike shared in the extra wealth generated by automation. That was the norm that was broken by Reagan.
"What makes you think that the top 1% benefited. Reagan increased taxes on the rich from 36% to 38%."
That must have been such a sacrifice! In dollar terms it's peanuts compared with the extra they were taking home. Look at total income trends since World War II broken down by income percentiles and you'll see a definite change after 1980. Maybe such data would be inconvenient for your case, but they are real numbers.
Incidentally, your pal Reagan wouldn't be allowed in the door of today's Republican Party because he actually dared raise taxes.
I agree completely. Ms. Rubin seems to steer the conversation right into a kind of primitive set of conservative talking points, which tends to make the conversation unnecessarily simplistic and reflexive, and not really up to the show's usual standards.
GMG wrote:
"I agree completely. Ms. Rubin seems to steer the conversation right into a kind of primitive set of conservative talking points, which tends to make the conversation unnecessarily simplistic and reflexive, and not really up to the show's usual standards."
-------------------------------------------------
Usual standards? Are those the standards were the primitive set of liberal talking points, that tend to make the conversation unnecessarily simplistic and reflexive, are the only opinions aired and that go unchallenged.
Listen how Rehm, the snarky Corn and snarky Cummings gang up on Jennifer.
"Charles Krauthammer Schools Jeanne Cummings: Gingrich Won in SC Because of Debates Not Money"
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/01/28/charles-krauthamme...
Long term listener commenting here. Over the radio Jennifer Rubin seems very argumentative and brings a harsh tone to the discussion. I myself don't think name-calling shorthand furthers any discussion. I tune in for information and enlightenment, not rehashing partisan arguments. Thanks.
nina21 wrote:
"Long term listener commenting here. Over the radio Jennifer Rubin seems very argumentative and brings a harsh tone to the discussion. I myself don't think name-calling shorthand furthers any discussion. I tune in for information and enlightenment, not rehashing partisan arguments. Thanks."
--------------------------------------
Where did Rubin resort to name-calling? The women has to contend with three liberal voices. This is the usual ratio when a conservative manages to get into a conversation on NPR.
You only tune into Diane Rehm for the liberal point of view and recoil when a voice of opposition manages to leak into the discussion? OK.
Regarding today's national Friday News Roundup, I felt that Jennifer Rubin (Ruben?) was a detriment to the conversation. She was strident and rude in her partisanship and did not meet the usual standard of the show, which is a model of informed and polite give and take on the issues. Her voice sounded angry, and that is what I'm trying to escape from when I listen to NPR.
As to Keystone, fine, if it has to being constructed, so be it.
Has anyone put strings to its use?
Is there any guarantee this pipeline oil will stay in the U.S. after it is refined?
If not, how can it possibly be more than a lining to the pockets of no one but the investers and builders of said pipeline?
I believe this refined oil will probably go to the highest bidder which is not necessarily a domestic supplier.
Should this be the case, I don't foresee domestic fuel prices dropping at all.
Why didn't you talk about the fact that the Keystone Pipeline will be delivering oil to the world market and won't be sold to Americans?! No one in the press is talking about this!!! It will have zero bearing on reducing American oil prices, and in fact will raise them because our domestic reserves will also be tapped to add oil to the pipeline once it starts flowing. That's OK with Big Oil, though...if there is oil scarcity they can justify raising prices. This project is designed solely to further enrich the oil companies. The 2000 working-class jobs that will be created are only temporary and it's set to damage the environment, especially the water source for the citizens of Nebraska. Why are we letting the rich and powerful remain rich and powerful? Because the corporate media is stifled.This is beyond disgusting. And we all just sit back and watch it happen.
Absolutely agreed. She was annoying and shouldn't be invited back.
OK, I get it loud and clear, liberals cannot stand be disagreed with and if you do you need to be silenced. We know who the real fascists are and their on the left.
I do have a question for you, though. If you are a conservative what in the world are you doing listehing to Diane Rehm and NPR??
Martha J. Hyde wrote:
"Regarding today's national Friday News Roundup, I felt that Jennifer Rubin (Ruben?) was a detriment to the conversation. She was strident and rude in her partisanship and did not meet the usual standard of the show, which is a model of informed and polite give and take on the issues. Her voice sounded angry, and that is what I'm trying to escape from when I listen to NPR."
------------------------------------------------
Dawnifer wrote:
"Absolutely agreed. She was annoying and shouldn't be invited back."
-----------------------------------------
Sure. Corn and Cummings are strident and annoying and partisans. But to the tin-eared liberals, their intolerance of Jennifer's opinions is not only expected on NPR, but demanded. Why are liberals always in the business of silencing opposing views over the airwaves?
Dawnifer wrote:
"I do have a question for you, though. If you are a conservative what in the world are you doing listehing to Diane Rehm and NPR??"
---------------------------------------
What better proof that liberals claim NPR as their private megaphone and are indignant when a conservative voice manages to slip into the conversation. Way to go!!!
I really cannot abide people who say, "Excuse me," with a tone that says,"Shut up, or I'm going to talk over you anyway."
Jennifer Rubin also likes to cherry pick facts for the magic of eliding important information. I have to discount everything she says, unless I have time to google or already know the facts about what she's saying.
Shudder.
Re: Ms. Rubin's comment that cuts to Medicare won't matter because those already on it will be able to keep it.
What I care about is not just me or my age group, or even all retirees. I care about everyone who will get older, who will need Medicare AS WE KNOW IT. Or, better yet, Medicare for All!! That would solve a lot of problems, including funding issues.
When I was young I was tested as having an IQ of, iirc, 149. I may have lost a few brain cells or speed of synaptic response since then, but when I turned 65 I tried to compare the predictable costs of both regular Medicare plans to the Medicare Advantage plans. I used the same predictable costs for each, but problems kept coming up in that the Medicare Advantage representatives kept saying they couldn't tell me is something was covered or not, how much coverage, applicable co-pay or not.
It was impossible to actually compare like to like, plus, of course, I would have been limited in my choice of doctors and probably could not afford things like physical therapy due to the recurring co-pays.
I gave up and too AARP's Plan F for a supplemental plan.
It is amazing that I don't have to spend hours on the phone trying to get a correct answer as to how or whether something is covered. What a relief. I also have to admit I keep fearing some letter will come telling me I wasn't covered for one doctor visit or another. But so far, so good.
However, I want other people in the retirement years to be able to have good, dependable, understandable coverage...and not have to play the telephone roulette games with one rep saying one thing, a second another, then a third yet another. And, when it's bucked up to a supervisor, the crap shoot begins again!
Medicare's help line has been extremely efficient and helpful.
I hope Ms. Rubin keeps upper percentile earning status, because if she gets what Ryan wants for us, and she loses her economic cushion, she'll find it a mean and ugly world out there.
LBJ gave me the very best birthday present I've ever received: The right to join Medicare.
Does Ms Rubin really mean for us to understand that the WaPo's editorial writers ignore facts when they write their editorials?
What good are they then?
Hello, Diane...I very much appreciate your show, and listen as often as I can.
Regarding the Trayvon Martin case in your discussion today, I was very distressed to hear Jennifer Rubin use the term "lynch mob" to describe Trayvon Martin's parents and their supporters. Doesn't she know anything about Southern history and the way black people have been treated in Florida and other Southern states?
Trayvon's parents, friends, and other concerned people are simply seeking justice.
To refer to them as a "lynch mob" is a travesty, and Ms. Rubin's comment is insensitive, incendiary, and shows complete ignorance of the way real lynch mobs incited by the Ku Klux Klan murdered black people for so many years.
Your show this coming Monday, March 26 will discuss the Trayvon Martin case in depth. I hope you will take a moment in Monday's show to repudiate Ms. Rubin's "lynch mob" comment; fairness and justice cannot allow such a reference to go unchallenged.
Thank you.
Beth Anne
jawbone wrote:
"Does Ms Rubin really mean for us to understand that the WaPo's editorial writers ignore facts when they write their editorials?
What good are they then?"
---------------------------------------------
That is not what Jennifer said. She said:
'There is a difference on our paper between editorial and reported news." Jennifer Rubin"
You just now discovered that the Op-Ed page is about opinion, not news fact? What good is the front page on some papers when there is no distinction from the Op-Ed page?
"Oct21 wrote:
dondraperisback wrote: "Why is it that not one of the Republican candidates for President has shown the least bit of compassion to the family of Trayvon Martin in the month since his death?"
Obviously because their glad he's dead!
...
March 23, 2012 - 9:37 am"
OCT 21 for Vice President on the 2012 Republican Ticket!!!!!!!
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
I believe this one of the most respectable shows on the scene. I am in awe of Dianne's finesse and decorum. However, today was a challenge. I readily admit to holding most of the views of David Corn and found him persistent in the conversation. Persistent not rude. Admittedly, I do not agree with most of Jennifer Rubin's views, but know rudeness when I hear it. I believe she was an inappropriate guest. The show has a non-adversarial history. Rubin was the lone pundit who frankly broke that decorum. Were it not for Ms. Rehm's class, this would have been hard to digest.
Lysanders wrote:
"I readily admit to holding most of the views of David Corn."
"The show has a non-adversarial history. Rubin was the lone pundit who frankly broke that decorum. Were it not for Ms. Rehm's class, this would have been hard to digest."
-------------------------------------------------------
Please. The reason why The DR Show, or NPR for that matter, can make their false claim that they are "non-adversarial" is because the lone and rarified conservative voice is not in attendance on the air. Rehm's FNR usually consists of a bunch of like-minded pundits without a dimes worth of difference between them.
Except the obnoxious Corn's sine qua non is to sell his opinions as if they are facts. That you align yourself with Corn undermines your characterization of Jennifer as indigestible.
The Bloomberg reporter said something that could not have been intended literally, yet nobody else remarked on it. She said the USA is now a net exporter of oil. That would seem to mean we are exporting more than we import, which also would be saying we are oil independent!
None of the speakers addressed the illogic of the drill, baby, drill crowd, with respect to independence. Since oil is a global market, does it really matter how much is drilled here? That domestically produced oil is subject to the world market price and may even be exported -- unless the implication of the drill, baby, people is that they would nationalize the oil industry to control marketing and price.
Dawnifer wrote: "I do have a question for you, though. If you are a conservative what in the world are you doing listehing to Diane Rehm and NPR??"
If anything it proves I can and want to listen to apposing views, you complainers who think the show is not liberal enough are the ones with a problem.
I'm sure you would feel the same if a liberal was interviewed by Billo. You'd jeer and laugh and mock the person, no doubt.
Your show is without peer. However, Ms. Rubin's comments really detracted from the discussion today. She seemed more interested in spewing the right-wing talking points than in having a reasoned discussion with the other members of the roundup panel. Fox News has enough people displaying rude behavior and mindless partisanship. I hope that either she changes her behavior or you find other guests to invite.
It is not that I believe you should avoid the conservative panelists, your discussions would lack depth without them, but please consider someone who is not a political mouthpiece, such as David Brooks or Thomas Friedman.
I hope Ms. Rubin enjoys her paychecks from the NRA and GOP, and never returns to your show.