More Leftist Bias From CBS, Dems Support Fraud Voter And Congressional Pay Raise

The Dan Ra^ther fake National Guard documents story is still the leading example of how Old Media uses its broadcast power to influence elections on behalf of the left. But CBS hasn't learned the lesson about being fair and objective. Newsbusters has a story about how CBS newsreaders fell all over themselves to criticize the income tax proposals from the GOP candidate pool, but gave no criticism at all for proposals coming from the Dems.

From the article:

Thursday's CBS Evening News took a look at the economic and tax plans for some of the candidates from both parties, but, while Democratic plans were reported without any references to criticism, correpondent Chip Reid took jabs at Republican tax cut plans, labeling that of Mitt Romney, who "made a fortune in business," as being "right out of the playbooks of Ronald Reagan and George Bush." Reid further suggested that Mike Huckabee's plan for a national sales tax contradicts his "populist" message of "protecting the middle class," as the CBS correspondent neglected to mention that Huckabee's plan would also abolish the federal income tax and provide rebates to those with lower incomes. ... Reid went on to report economic plans of Democrats Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards without mentioning any potential down sides to raising the minimum wage or to raising taxes on the wealthy. Reid: "The Democrats' economic game plan is dramatically different. ... They say what's needed is help for the middle class, not for corporations and the wealthy."

Reid never mentions the fact that raising taxes depresses an economy and causes a loss of jobs due to inadequate capital for job creation. He also never mentions the fact that ultimately, all tax hikes are paid for by the middle class. This is typical of a leftist-socialist who doesn't understand the dynamics of a robust economy.

CBS is apparently stumping for the Dems by witholding crucial information about the effects increased taxes will have on our economy while simultaneously handing out standard leftist innuendo about tax cuts.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

CBS Takes Jabs At GOP Tax Plans, Reports Dem Plans Without Criticism
Brad Wilmouth
NewsBusters.org
January 10, 2008

---

Neal Boortz has an interesting tidbit about the Dem's poster child for striking down Indiana's Voter ID law. It seems that 72-year-old Faye Buis-Ewing is in violation of the law when it comes to voting.

According to Nealz Newz:

She has become a "poster child" for the disenfranchised voter that will be protected under a voting system with no ID requirements. But now we've discovered one minor problem. Not only is Faye registered to vote, but she is registered in two different states. She claims two states as her primary residence. She received a homestead exemption on her property taxes ... in two different states. In other words, the leftist poster girl for their fight against voter identification laws is a criminal. What a shame. Faye could not only vote, but she could technically vote more than the average citizen registered in only one state! She explains that she and her husband "winter in Florida and summer in Indiana." Isn't that sweet? She says that she has never voted in Florida, but she has a Florida driver's license. And when she went to vote in Indiana in November 2006 with her Florida driver's license, they, logically, did not accept it. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me! But hey, this is the average voter we are speaking of. Now the League of Women Voters (I'm sure they are my biggest fans) say this experience is exactly the reason the law should be changed. No, ladies .... That is exactly the reason why the law should be upheld! I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that Faye is voting for Hillary Clinton. Maybe twice.

Now, I'll bet that if it were the Republicans trying to do away with the Indiana law, this story would be all over Old Media.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Voter ID Law
Neal Boortz
Boortz.com
January 11, 2008

---

Some people around the country are starting to worry about their employment propects due to a deteriorating economy. But members of Congress are above all of that. Despite a record low approval rating, they are getting a $4000 pay raise.

From the Associated Press:

Lawmakers in 2008 will receive salaries of $169,300, a boost of $4,100 over the pay they have lived with since January 2006. That 2.5 percent increase is mirrored by similar raises for associate justices of the Supreme Court, who will see their pay go from $203,000 to $208,100, and Chief Justice John Roberts, whose pay will rise to $217,400 from $212,100. The salary figures were published in Tuesday's edition of the Federal Register. Last year was the first since 1999, when the pay was $136,700, that members of Congress did not receive a cost-of-living allowance raise along with other federal employees. Democrats, newly elected to the majority, had vowed to block an increase in their paychecks until Congress raised the minimum wage. With the minimum wage increase accomplished last year, House Democratic leaders joined with their Republican counterparts to oppose a procedural vote to bring the COLA issue to the floor, leaving the way clear for their automatic raise.

Interesting that they do more to put people out of work than any other group in the nation, and they get a pay raise for it.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Congress Members Get $4,000 Pay Raise
Jim Abrams
Associated Press via GOPUSA.com
January 10, 2008

Campaign 'Dirty Tricks,' Voter IDs And Ann Coulter's Dad

So, why would Old Media be squawking about campaign "dirty tricks" when they themselves are more guilty of dirty tricks than anyone else? Well, it's just the old leftist double standard at at work. Apparently, when Old Media comes up with something that hurts a GOP candidate, it is good journalism, but when someone comes up with something that hurts a Dem candidate, Old Media brands it as "dirty."

Writing for Accuracy In Media, Cliff Kincaid and Roger Aronoff have the following to say:

ABC reporter Brian Ross suggested that campaigns which expose other candidates' lies and deceptions are somehow engaging in dirty tricks. He cited the cases of Republicans helping expose Al Gore and John Kerry as liars. One case involved Gore, during a 2000 presidential debate with George W. Bush, making a false claim about flying with then FEMA director James Lee Witt to observe some oil fires in Texas. Ross said Gore had "walked into a trap" when he said that, and strongly implied that it was dirty politics to point out that he was lying. Gore, when confronted with the record, admitted the story was false the next day on Good Morning America. What is dirty about that? Another example of a supposedly dirty trick against Democrats was when a Republican operative had, in 2004, confidentially given Brian Ross a videotape of an interview with John Kerry from 1971, in which Kerry is seen saying, totally in proper context, that he had given back "six, seven, eight or nine" of his Vietnam medals, though he had been denying that on the campaign trail. Ross said ABC had verified the authenticity of the tape, and put it on the air. He then showed what he described as a "suspicious and angry Kerry" who accused ABC "correctly of using Republican material." But it wasn't Republican material, it was a videotape of a TV show that was given to them by a Republican operative. What is wrong with Republicans exposing Democratic lies?

Apparently nothing, unless you happen to be a leftist-leaning reporter pushing a leftist-leaning agenda rather than actually reporting news.

The article goes on:

Other cases cited by Ross involved good old-fashioned opposition research. All of these activities, including the distribution of videos of candidates making contradictory statements, are legitimate. What makes them possibly illegitimate is when the media focus on them to the exclusion of a serious discussion of substance and issues. The Washington Post, for example, ran a series of stories during the Virginia Senate contest about Republican George Allen getting caught on video using the term "Macaca" to describe a campaign worker for his opponent, Jim Webb. The Post constantly implied, without proof, that this was racist on Allen's part. Allen mishandled the controversy, in part by failing to adequately explain where the mysterious term had come from. In the end, the controversy prevented Allen from talking about legitimate campaign issues and was a major distraction. The coverage had the intended effect, from the point of view of the liberal Post. It helped elect Webb.

And Webb has turned out to be a liar himself. One of his beggest campaign promises was that he would never vote to raise taxes and Virginia believed him. On his first opportunity to vote on a possible tax increase, Webb decided to become a lapdog of the DNC rather than represent his constituents. He voted to approve of an $800 billion tax increase despite his promise not to do so.

So, the next time you hear Old Media complaining about "dirty tricks," it probably means that someone in the GOP did some pretty thorough research.

Who's Guilty Of Campaign Dirty Tricks?
Cliff Kincaid and Roger Aronoff
Accuracy In Media via GOPUSA.com
January 8, 2008

---

Yesterday, the Supreme Court took up the issue of requiring voters to show proper identification before being allowed to vate. Personally, I think this is a good idea. It would help to prevent situations where people try to vote twice, try to vote in someone else's place or try to vote under a false name.

From Fox News:

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments challenging the Hoosier State’s controversial 2005 voter ID law. It’s the highest-profile Republican v. Democrat case to reach the high court since the infamous 2000 Bush v. Gore lawsuit that effectively decided that year’s presidential race. This case doesn’t have as much at stake, but has still managed to inflame the passions of political partisans even during this primary season. The law was passed on a party-line vote by a Republican-controlled legislature and signed into law by Governor Mitch Daniels — also a Republican. Those in favor of it argue that the law is necessary to help prevent election fraud at the polls. They also note that the Indiana law is one part of a nationwide trend since the controversial Florida ballot counting in 2000 to maintain and improve the integrity of the election process. And they say that the law effectively combats bloated voter registration lists that could be ripe for abuse

And that is the big issue, combating voter abuse. Opponents claim that it amounts to a new poll tax but that hasn't panned out since they have been completely unable to produce anyone who was actually barred from voting under the new law.

Here in Loudoun County, Virginia, we are required to show proper ID before voting and that is the way it should be.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Supreme Court To Hear Arguments Challenging Voter ID Law
Lee Ross
Fox News
January 8, 2008

---

And finally, we note with sadness that Ann Coulter's father has passed away. Ann has written a very moving tribute to John Vincent Coulter:

Father hated puffery, pomposity, snobbery, fake friendliness, fake anything. Like Kitty's father in "Anna Karenina," he could detect a substanceless suitor in a heartbeat. (They were probably the same ones who looked nervous when I told them Father was ex-FBI and liked to shoot squirrels in the backyard.) He hated unions because of their corrupt leadership, ripping off the members for their own aggrandizement. But he had more respect for genuine working men than anyone I've ever known. He was, in short, the molecular opposite of John Edwards. Father didn't care what popular opinion was: There was right and wrong. I don't recall his ever specifically talking about J. Edgar Hoover or Joe McCarthy, but we knew he thought the popular histories were bunk. That's why "Treason" was dedicated to him, the last book of mine he was able to read. ... When Mother was in a rehabilitative facility briefly after surgery a few years ago and Father was not supposed to be driving, we were relieved that a snowstorm had knocked out the power to the garage door opener, so Daddy couldn't get to the car. It would just be a week and then Mother would be home. My brother came home to check on Father the first day of this arrangement to find that he had taken an ax to the side door of the garage, so he could drive to the rehab center and sit with Mother all day.

Mr. Coulter sounds like a very devoted man.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

John Vincent Coulter
Ann Coulter
AnnCoulter.com
January 9, 2008