John Hinderaker, Powerline

What a hideous deal! The Democrats have agreed to cloture on only three nominees, and they have made no commitment not to filibuster in the future, if there are “extraordinary circumstances.” Of course, the Dems think any nominee who is a Republican is “extraordinary.” The Dems have just wriggled off the hook on some of the nominees that, politically, some of them did not want to be seen voting against.

Someone explain to me why the Republicans haven’t been rolled once again. To me, it looks like a pathetic collapse on the part of the Republicans–not the leadership, but Senators like McCain who sold out their party.

ONE MORE: Now the Republicans are treating the execrable Robert Byrd like a hero! Unbelievable. What a low moment. “We have kept the Republic,” Byrd says. I think I’m going to be sick.

Hugh Hewitt,

It is impossible to say whether this is a “terrible” deal, a “bad” deal, or a very, very marginally “ok” deal, but it surely is not a good deal.

Ed Hennessey, Captain’s Quarters,

If the Republicans have foresworn the Byrd option without an ironclad guarantee that the filibuster will not be used on nominees with majority support, then they have traded their hard-won majority for de facto minority status — and the leadership will have to answer for this result.

Mark Tapscott (via Malkin)

I said months ago that Senate GOPers are terrified of offending Senate Democrats. Now we will see the Senate GOP leadership desperately searching for a way to share in the glory that even as this post is being written is being prepared by the MSM to shower upon Senate “moderates” of both parties who “saved” the Senate and the federal judiciary from the Extreme Right and the Evangelical Christian Theocracy.

Good Call Indeed. The first wire stories are rolling in,

Boston Globe Headline: Modeates Reach Filibuster Deal
When you click the link, the headline to the AP story reads “Senators avert showdown over filibusters”. Interesting.

WASHINGTON –In a dramatic reach across party lines, Senate centrists sealed a compromise Monday night to clear the way for confirmation of many of President Bush’s stalled judicial nominees, leave others in limbo and preserve venerable filibuster rules.

“In a Senate that has become increasingly partisan and polarized, the bipartisan center held,” said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., one of 14 senators –seven from each party — to pledge their “mutual trust and confidence” on the deal.

Blogs for Bush is liveblogging and has tons of great links.

Katie’s Message to the military
Originally uploaded by punditreview.

Three Cheers to Laura Bush for calling Katie Couric on her bias against the military!

Hat Tip: The Corner

From the Today Show, May 23, 2005

Katie Couric:

“In your view, is the administration holding the people who are doing these things, and perhaps they are in the minority as you say, but do you think they’re being held sufficiently accountable?”

Mrs. Bush took exception to Katie’s P-word:

“Yes I do. I mean there’s investigations going on the people are being held accountable and it’s not ‘a perhaps in the minority’. We know it’s very, very few people. A handful of people. We know that overall our troops are serving with distinction. They’re very helpful to the people where they are. They’re building schools, they’re refurbishing schools. They’re drilling well waters so that villages have clean water. They’re helping both Afghanistan and Iraq as they build they’re countries. They’re training troops in Iraq and policemen there.”

“So the, the sad news is that the coverage is so extreme of a handful of really, really bad cases. And the American people are sick about it. They don’t want people around the world to have an image of Americans like that, because that’s not the way Americans really are. And it’s certainly not the way our troops, overall, serve anywhere around the world.”

Boston’s talk leader, WRKO, has decided to replace Newsweak International with Pundit Review Radio, a show that promotes bloggers. Ouch!

Each Sunday evening at 9PM EST, we will examine traditional talk radio topics (politics, media, culture) by highlighting the work of the best, most insightful thought leaders in the new media.

And by best, we mean THE best. Here is the guest line-up for our first month on WRKO,

May 22: James Taranto from Opinion Journal’s Best of the Web
May 29: Don Luskin of National Review, Smart Money and PoorandStupid.com
June 5: Scott Johnson, Powerline
June 12: Hugh Hewitt

You can listen to the show live at WRKO and you can reach us toll free at 877-469-4322.

We want to thank everyone who has supported the show this week by alerting your readers and linking to us. We truly appreciate your support.

Talk to you Sunday evening.

Saddam
Originally uploaded by punditreview.

We didn’t even ask if he wanted boxers or briefs.

Junk Yard Blog has the goods on another high profile mainstream media member trashing the US military.

Linda Foley is the International President of the Newspaper Guild and is also president of Communications Workers of America, the nation’s largest broadcast and journalism workers union. Take it away Ms. Foley,

Journalists, by the way, are not just being targeted verbally or �?�ah, or�?� ah, politically. They are also being targeted for real, um�?�in places like Iraq. What outrages me as a representative of journalists is that there’s not more outrage about the number, and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq. They target and kill journalists�?�uh, from other countries, particularly Arab countries like Al -, like Arab news services like Al-Jazeera, for example. They actually target them and blow up their studios with impunity�?�

Bryan Preston at Junk Yard Blog says,

So like Eason Jordan, Foley made a completely unsubstantiated and outrageous claim that the US military is targeting journalists in Iraq for murder. Unlike Eason Jordan, there is a tape. She said what’s written above. I saw the tape and heard her words. There is no doubt what she said, and there is no doubt that she offered up nothing in the way of evidence to substantiate her claim.

For our previous coverage of Eason Jordan, click here.

Is it any wonder that your Average Joe thinks the mainstream media is doing a lousy job? Few industries outside of Hollywood and maybe professional sports have a greater sense of self worth than MSM journalists.

Survey: Press, public not on the same page
By Mark Jurkowitz, Boston Globe

A University of Connecticut survey released today reveals some significant disagreements between journalists and the general public over the quality of today’s reporting and the boundaries of press freedom.

While 72 percent of the journalists said their profession did a good or excellent job of reporting information accurately, only 39 percent of the public felt the same way. At the same time, 61 percent of the citizen respondents said they disagreed with the statement that ”the news media tries to report the news without bias.”

Some survey findings may provide fodder for conservatives who complain about liberal tilt in the press. When asked to identify themselves politically, one-third of the journalists and one-third of the citizens said they were Democrats. The divergence came when 32 percent of the public identified themselves as Republicans, compared with only 10 percent of the newsroom employees. Among journalists who said they voted in the 2004 election, 68 percent reported favoring John Kerry and 25 percent chose George Bush. Yet among the public respondents who said they voted, Bush beat Kerry 54 percent to 44 percent.

Newsweak could have saved themselves a lot of trouble if only they had thought to do this.

Ever since Newsweak magazine published an article on May 9 about alleged abuses at Guantanamo Bay, specifically the desecration of a Koran, the Muslim world has been protesting the US. Afghanistan has been rocked by protests and violence. So far 16 people have been killed and more than 100 injured.

And now Newsweak comes out, on May 15, and says they got it wrong. The desecration of the Koran by US troops at Guantanamo never happened.

What more could Newsweak possibly do to damage the US and put our troops in a more difficult situation? How would you like to be a 19 year old American GI in Afghanistan this morning? Is it any wonder why people question the motives of the mainstream media? South Park Conservatives is a book about this very subject. The subtitle, The Revolt Against Liberal Media Bias

John Steel Gordon is a best selling author of a number of books about Wall Street and American capitalism. He is also, apparently, a frequent reader of Powerline. Here is what he sent the guys at Powerline regarding this Newsweak mess,

Liberal MSM magazine finds marginally credible story that makes the military
(and Bush Administration) look bad and rushes into print with it without any
consideration of the possible consequences. So what else is new?

What I find most interesting is that Newsweek insists on spelling the name of the holy book of Islam “Qur’an” despite the fact that there has been a perfectly good word for it in use in the English language (”Koran”) since 1625. “Qur’an” is a
transliteration of the Arabic word for the Koran (although my dictionary says
there should be a long vowel mark over the A–but, since I don’t speak Arabic, I
will have to take its word for it). So using Qur’an instead of Koran is like
using “Athina” for “Athens” of “Moskva” for “Moscow.” In other words, political
correctness run amok.I think the apostrophe–utterly meaningless in an
English-language context–is a particularly nice touch of cultural pandering.

Interesting observation indeed.

Instapundit on Newsweak,

People died, and U.S. military and diplomatic efforts were damaged, because
– let’s be clear here — Newsweek was too anxious to get out a story that would
make the Bush Administration and the military look bad.

from our firends over at Citizen Journal,

FILIBUSTED!!!!!

Who said it?1) “I find it simply baffling that a Senator would vote against even voting on a judicial nomination.”

2) “I have stated over and over again … that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported.”

3) “Even if they tend to vote against the nomination itself, it is wrong to filibuster a nomination, and the senators who believe in fairness will not let a minority of the Senate deny the nominee his vote by the entire Senate.”

And the answers are

johnkerry
Originally uploaded by punditreview.

Exactly 100 days ago John Kerry went on national TV and said he would sign Form 180 which would allow all of his military records to be released. He still has not done so. What possible reasonable explanation could John Kerry have for lying about his willingness to sign the form?

Meet The Press, January 30, 2005

MR. RUSSERT: Many people who’ve been criticizing you have said: Senator, if you would just do one thing and that is sign Form 180, which would allow historians and journalists complete access to all your military records. Thus far, you have gotten the records, released them through your campaign. They say you should not be the filter. Sign Form 180 and let the historians…

SEN. KERRY: I’d be happy to put the records out. We put all the records out that I had been sent by the military. Then at the last moment, they sent some more stuff, which had some things that weren’t even relevant to the record. So when we get–I’m going to sit down with them and make sure that they are clear and I am clear as to what is in the record and what isn’t in the record and we’ll put it out. I have no problem with that.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you sign Form 180?
SEN. KERRY: But everything, Tim…
MR. RUSSERT: Would you sign Form 180?

SEN. KERRY: Yes, I will. But everything that we put in it, Tim–everything we put in–I mean, everything that was out was a full documentation of all of the medical records, all of the fitness reports. And I’d call on those who have challenged me, let’s see their records. I want to see the records of each of those people who have put up
a challenge, because some of them have some serious questions in them, and it
hasn’t been appropriate…

MR. RUSSERT: So they should sign Form 180s for themselves as well?

SEN. KERRY: You bet.

We all know how outragged John Kerry was during the campaign when he was claiming that George Bush lied to him about the WMD intelligence (put aside the fact that they looked at the same evidence and reached the same conclusion). The Swift Boat Vets raised some serious questions about John Kerry and his refusal to sign this form has me wondering why.

TedK
Originally uploaded by punditreview.

Boston Herald

Ted K�??s big fat tax loophole: Millionaire blames windfall on �??error�??

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy got hefty tax breaks on his $4.5 million Washington, D.C., mansion for at least two years - even though he never met the basic residency requirement for the deductions.

While Kennedy resides in Massachusetts, he received property tax credits in 2003 and 2004 on his home in a tony Washington neighborhood that were meant only
for homeowners who call D.C. their principal residence.

Of 22 senators who took the deduction, Kennedy stood to save the most money
in the coming tax year - about $7,700 off the tax bill for his $4.5 million
home, according to a review by the Kansas City Star of tax and real estate
records.

Called on the issue yesterday, the Bay State senator’s staff said Washington
officials gave him the deductions in error and without his knowledge - and vowed
he will reimburse the D.C. government for the property tax breaks. His
staff did not provide specifics on how much he owes or why he had failed to
previously notice the deductions being made.

Ted Kennedy on Tax Reform
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Voted NO on cutting taxes by $1.35 trillion over 11 years. (May 2001)
Voted NO on eliminating the ‘marriage penalty’. (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on $792B tax cuts. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on requiring super-majority for raising taxes. (Apr 1998)
Voted NO on FY99 tax cuts. (Apr 1998)
Rated 17% by NTU, indicating a “Big Spender” on tax votes. (Dec 2003)