ABC and NBC on Wednesday night managed to contain to a brief item their enthusiasm for First Lady Michelle Obama planting her garden for the season, but not CBS which dedicated a full story to how the hula-hooping First Lady “is enjoying the kind of popularity her husband would jump through hoops for.”

Employing some creative puns playing off the gardening theme, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric plugged the upcoming topic: “The First Lady planting a garden and harvesting a bumper crop of good will.” And on CBSNews.com: “Michelle Obama Blooms in the White House; Back in the White House Garden, the First Lady’s Popularity is Already Growing by the Bushel.” On air, Couric set up the story:

It is spring and Michelle Obama was back in her White House garden today. Nancy Cordes tells us one thing that is already growing is the First Lady’s popularity.

Cordes recounted how “her approval ratings stand at 78 percent, higher than her recent predecessors at similar points in their husband’s presidencies. She has settled on a signature issue: childhood obesity,” used “her clout to chide grocery manufacturers” and even partook in “hula-hooping to show children how easy it is to get exercise.”

Over video of the First Lady’s digging her hands into dirt, Cordes credited her popularity to how “she hasn’t been afraid to get her hands dirty” by taking “fashion risks,” “political risks” and by “granting an interview to right-leaning Fox News before her husband would.”

Quite a tough diet for DC’s homeless, who last year were provided with some of what gew in the South Lawn garden. Cordes related: “The First Lady and her army of pre-teen planters added bok choy, artichokes, and mustard greens to the White House garden today…”

Bok choy, artichokes and mustard greens. Hard to see many of the homeless lining up for those.

Earlier puffery for the current FLOTUS:

January: “ABC Fawns Over ‘Every Woman’ Michelle Obama Who ‘Wows’ the World.”

October: “CBS’s Schieffer Hails First Lady Frolic on White House Lawn.”

The MRC’s Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the story on the Wednesday, March 31 CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: It is spring and Michelle Obama was back in her White House garden today. Nancy Cordes tells us one thing that is already growing is the First Lady’s popularity.

MICHELLE OBAMA: You guys, will you show me what to do so I can-

NANCY CORDES: The First Lady and her army of pre-teen planters added bok choy, artichokes, and mustard greens to the White House garden today, which weathered Washington’s wild winter under a cozy plastic covering.

MICHELLE OBAMA CLIP #1: Would you ever imagine that what you did last year would lead to all of this?

MICHELLE OBAMA CLIP #2: Can I have some hugs?

CORDES: Fourteen months into her tenure as First Lady, Michelle Obama is enjoying the kind of popularity her husband would jump through hoops for. Her approval ratings stand at 78 percent, higher than her recent predecessors at similar points in their husband’s presidencies. She has settled on a signature issue: childhood obesity.

MICHELLE OBAMA: -because cheese isn’t bad, especially when you’re a kid.

CORDES: Using her clout to chide grocery manufacturers.

MICHELLE OBAMA: We need you all to step it up.

CORDES: Even hula hooping to show children how easy it is to get exercise.

KATHERINE TALLMADGE, AMERICAN DIABETIC ASSOCIATION: I love the way that  Mrs. Obama has stressed the simple things that people can change to make a huge difference in their lives.

CORDES: She’s taken fashion risks, yes, but political risks, too – addressing the issue of race-

MICHELLE OBAMA: There were kids around my neighborhood who would say, “Oh, you talk funny, you talk like a white girl."

CORDES: -and granting an interview to right-leaning Fox News before her husband would.

MICHELLE OBAMA TO MIKE HUCKABEE: You know, this is a solve-able issue.

CORDES: In short, she hasn’t been afraid to get her hands dirty, which seems to have gone over well with most Americans. Nancy Cordes, CBS News, Washington.

On Wednesday’s American Morning, CNN’s Ed Lavandera focused on the "overwhelmingly white" turnout at the rallies sponsored by the Tea Party Express organization and played up the criticisms that there is an "anti-minority undertone" at the demonstrations.

Lavandera, who is covering the Tea Party Express’ cross-country tour, highlighted the race issue from the beginning of his report, which first aired 13 minutes into the 8 am Eastern hour: "The crowds turning out for the Tea Party Express rallies are overwhelmingly white. Is this lack of diversity a problem for the Tea Party movement? We’re taking a closer look."

The correspondent noted some of the apparently "subtle efforts to make the tea party appear diverse," such as a hip hop performance and speeches by black tea party activist Lloyd Marcus. Marcus stated that "there’s not a lot of black folks here, basically, because they haven’t seen the light yet. They are still hypnotized by the first black or African-American president. But they haven’t really looked at the man and what he’s doing." This assertion is supported by a Gallup poll from earlier in March that found that President Obama’s approval rating among blacks is at 89%, down slightly from 96% in August 2009.

But instead of focusing on this statistic as a possible cause for the lack of minority turnout at tea parties, Lavandera hinted that racism was actually to blame for this phenomenon:

LAVANDERA (voice-over): Critics argue there’s an anti-minority undertone to these rallies. One anti-tea party protester lashed out at a campaigning candidate about the issue.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE 1: Other than the people that are covering the story here, the only people I see are retired white people.

LAVANDERA: At the Tea Party Express kickoff rally, one woman carried a sign with a stuffed monkey that read, ‘Send Obama back to Kenya.’ Tea party activists signs also rail against immigration reform with a tone that could offend Latinos. Tea party activists, though, say attempts to portray the group as racist or not open to welcoming minorities is a biased, unfair attack.

MARK WILLIAMS, TEA PARTY EXPRESS: Don’t believe the crock you’re reading in some media about racism. I don’t see the lack of diversity at all.

LAVANDERA: Tea party chairman Mark Williams argues the movement is incredibly diverse, and says there are no specific efforts to reach out to minorities.

LAVANDERA (on-camera): So there’s no sense that you, maybe, need to go out and target black people, Hispanic people, to bring them into the fold.

WILLIAMS: All they need to do is read the Constitution and they’ll come find us.

When the CNN replayed the correspondent’s report during the 3 pm Eastern hour of their Rick’s List program, an on-screen graphic bluntly stated, "’Not A Lot of Black Folks Here:’ Tea Party Express crowds show little diversity."

This liberal slant against the tea parties isn’t surprising at CNN. Almost a year ago, former correspondent Susan Roesgen slammed the movement as "anti-government…anti-CNN…and not really family viewing." Later that year, CNN journalist Jim Spellman tried to portray the participants at the Tea Party Express’s cross-country bus tour last summer as a bunch of extremists.

Near the end of Wednesday’s Dylan Ratigan Show on MSNBC, host Dylan Ratigan led his ‘Busted’ segment by claiming that The Drudge Report did "not let facts get in the way of a good headline" on Tuesday, by featuring one which read: "CIA: Iran Moving Closer to Nuclear Weapon." Ratigan remarked: "That’ll get the ratings up."

Despite the fact that most of the world has long operated under the assumption that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, including the Obama administration, Ratigan singled out Matt Drudge’s website for scorn, arguing: "Sounds pretty scary, right? Until you find out what the CIA report actually said. The agency’s intelligence actually shows that Iran is quote, ‘keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons,’ but that they quote ‘do not know’ whether Tehran will ultimately head down that road." The headline on screen read: "Misinformed; Wordplay On Iran’s Nuke Plans."

Ratigan eventually revealed where he received his liberal taking points: "the truth, why would you let that get in the way of ratings? As our friend Glenn Greenwald from Salon.com points out on his blog, false reporting on Iran could be ultimately be far more dangerous than the perceived threat itself. Let’s try to stick to the facts."

Actually, Ratigan sanitized the last line of Greenwald’s blog, which proclaims: "As the invasion of Iraq demonstrated, the kind of fear-mongering, reckless, and outright false ‘reporting’ we’re seeing already – and have been seeing for awhile – over Iran’s nuclear program poses a far greater danger to the U.S. than anything Iran could do."

Here is a full transcript of Ratigan’s rant:

4:50PM

DYLAN RATIGAN: A little ‘Busted’ for you. Up first, do not let facts get in the way of a good headline. It’s better for the ratings, as we discussed with both Lynn Sweet and Chrystia Freeland. Yesterday, the Drudge Report happy to oblige, among other news outlets, claiming that a CIA report insists that Iran, and I will quote, ‘is moving closer to a nuclear weapon.’ That’ll get the ratings up. Sounds pretty scary, right? Until you find out what the CIA report actually said. The agency’s intelligence actually shows that Iran is quote, ‘keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons,’ but that they quote ‘do not know’ whether Tehran will ultimately head down that road. Is it me or is that different? Maybe not as good for ratings. And the truth, why would you let that get in the way of ratings? As our friend Glenn Greenwald from Salon.com points out on his blog, false reporting on Iran could be ultimately be far more dangerous than the perceived threat itself. Let’s try to stick to the facts.

According to MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan, Barack Obama is nothing more than a shill for the Republican Party. The liberal anchor on Wednesday railed against the President’s plan to allow limited offshore oil drilling: "This is a fraud…Is a pattern emerging? Is President Obama nothing more than a Democrat in name only? Dare we say it? A DINO?" [Audio available here.]

According to Ratigan, Obama, the same man who created a massive new entitlement with his health care bill, who ushered in the stimulus bill, is actually an operative for the GOP. He complained, "Look at the subsidization of the banking industry that goes on to this day or reports of the impending deal with the Republicans to forego civilian trials for Gitmo terror suspects in favor of military trials. Wasn’t Gitmo supposed to be closed by now, anyway?"

Ratigan’s hyperbolic language continued. He fretted, "The President clearly defying expectations. The question, is it betrayal or a true bipartisanship?" As for the actual Republicans, he derided them for supporting offshore drilling: "Again, I could point to the opposition party’s absurdity in dragging this country lower as opposed to calling the Democrats out for their nonsense solutions. We’re accommodating another party and adding nonsense solutions."

Ratigan, who now worries that Obama might be a secret Republican, previously savaged the GOP. On October 5, 2009, he attacked, "I mean, there are people that are actually trying to derail health care in order to take down Obama, even if it means half the country dies."

A partial transcript of the March 31 Dylan Ratigan Show segment, which aired at 4:32pm EDT, follows:

[Clips from 2008 of people chanting, "Drill, baby, drill.]

DYLAN RATIGAN: God, it feels good to say, doesn’t it? Drill, baby, drill. Welcome back. We’re talking oil and politics. Remember those chants "Drill, baby, drill" from the Republican National Convention? Now it seems that our Democratic President has adopted the same chant. It is fun. This morning the President announced a plan to open up waters off the coast of the America, up and down the east coast, oil drilling declared the move part of a larger goal of energy independence.

BARACK OBAMA: We’re going to lead by example and practice what we preach. Cutting waste, saving energy and reducing our reliance on foreign oil.

RATIGAN: Problem of course, as you likely know, is that this plan runs directly counter to what he said on the campaign trail, specifically even though the White House says the President has been consistent.

OBAMA (June 2008): Believe me, if I thought there was any evidence at all that drilling could save people money who are struggling to fill up their gas tanks by this summer or this year or even the next few years, I would consider it. But, it won’t.

RATIGAN: An interesting about-face, seen as a nod to Republicans, one that may be closely tied to the fate of a climate bill in the Senate. Moderate Democrats admitting that legislation is unlikely to pass without an extension of drilling to gain Republican’s support. GOP leaders today are already arguing the plan doesn’t go far enough. House Minority Leader John Boehner says, quote, "keeping the pacific coast and Alaska as well as the most promising resources of the Gulf of Mexico under lock and key makes no sense at a time when gasoline prices are rising and Americans are asking, where are the jobs?" This seems like a good place to mention that of the $10.7 million spent by the oil lobby so far in 2010, granted it’s only been three months, more than two-thirds of that money has gone to Republicans and the special interest giving that money stand to make a small fortune if the drilling is opened up. And yet the amount of oil made available to us to reduce our dependence on foreign energy would not come online for at least five to ten years. And even if we had all of it, might give you a year’s worth of oil. This is a fraud. So, why is Democrat Obama making- proposing a plan- sure the oil companies will grin- but is it yet another false solution? Is a pattern emerging? Is President Obama nothing more than a Democrat in name only? Dare we say it? A DINO? Look at the giveaway to special interest in the health care bill. Extraordinary, their willingness to accommodate every special interest at the expense of efficiency and Americans in order to expand health care. Look at the subsidization of the banking industry that goes on to this day or reports of the impending deal with the Republicans to forego civilian trials for Gitmo terror suspects in favor of military trials. Wasn’t Gitmo supposed to be closed by now, anyway? I don’t know. The President clearly defying expectations. The question, is it betrayal or a true bipartisanship? Or is he simply trying to gain the next election with false solutions that may be politically popular but, actually, once again, further do a disservice to this country?

…

RATIGAN: But, what appears to be going on here is that we’re going to be looking at rising gas prices this summer. There’s a midterm election this fall. The Republicans were going to take cracks at the President for his failure do this. Again, I could point to the opposition party’s absurdity in dragging this country lower as opposed to calling the Democrats out for their nonsense solutions. We’re accommodating another party and adding nonsense solutions. Is there anything that you see here, Jane, that is more than political gaming at the Democrats by the expense of America?

JANE HAMSHER (Firedoglake.com): Well, he seems to think that this will bring Republican votes. Health care is any example of how successful that will be, that doesn’t look like it’s going to be in the game plan. They’re already out there as you say demagoging the issue and saying it doesn’t go far enough. So, they’re going to oppose it. But, maybe, as you note, they’ve spent- the oil industry’s spent so much money on the Republicans that he’s hoping that they stay bought.

I must have missed the groundswell of support and the public clamor for the return of Rosie O’Donnell to the daytime airwaves. It seemed that her time in the cultural spotlight had passed following her notorious 2008 variety show failure (It was hailed by one merciful critic as "dead on arrival") and her exile to a daily Sirius XM radio show that caters to creepy shut-ins and those unlucky listeners who can’t figure out how to tune-in to Howard Stern. But like some sort of loudmouthed, frumpy, left-wing vampire who just won’t stay in the ground, she is threatening to rise again with a terrifying plan to replace Oprah once the Queen of Daytime TV retires in 2011. Someone in Hollywood, please – break out the garlic.

Of course, I’m hardly Rosie’s daily television show target demographic. I work for a living instead of sitting at home staring slack-jawed at the succession of Sham-Wow commercials and ads for shyster lawyers promising big payouts for the imaginary injuries of their deadbeat clients that fill the time between inane segments of mindless yak. And while the social parasite demographic seems to grow larger after every freebie, hand-out and pay-off the Administration and its Congressional flunkies issue in favor of their employment-averse constituents, Rosie O’Donnell still seems like a bad economic bet.

This is no longer the same country as it was back in 1999 when Rosie was honchoing her first daytime gabfest and hassling Tom Selleck over his support for the Second Amendment of the Constitution. It’s not even the same country as it was in May 2007, when the former "Queen of Nice’s" anti-conservative bile culminated in her slandering American fighting men and women as terrorists on The View:

ROSIE O‘DONNELL, HOST, "THE VIEW": 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?

ELISABETH HASSELBECK, "VIEW" CO-HOST: Who are the terrorists?

O‘DONNELL: 655 Iraqis-I‘m saying you have to look-we invaded…

HASSELBECK: Wait, who are you calling terrorists?

O‘DONNELL: I‘m saying that, if you were in Iraq, and another country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?

She also takes particular pleasure in attacking the Catholic Church and seems to consider anyone not buying wholesale into her radical agenda against traditional marriage and adoption as a contemptible bigot. And let’s not forget her equally insightful foray into that moronic twilight zone known as 9/11 trutherism; it completes her personal trifecta of idiocy.

Rosie’s backers for the new show seem excited at the chance to pick up Oprah’s viewers, whose departure will apparently leave them without a reason to live. "Those 4, 5, 6 ratings points have to go somewhere," one told Variety. "Something’s going to come in and fill that vacuum."

But with the President’s approval ratings in freefall, and with Congress envying the polling numbers achieved by such public favorites as Kim Jong-Il, Vanilla Ice and syphilis, it is a new world. Rosie’s kind of aggressive, grating, in-your-face liberal stupidity may well serve to alienate a substantial part of today’s potential audience. Her partners seem to know it too, assuring Variety that:

"If Rosie wanted to just have a platform for her causes, she would go get a show on cable news . . . . She’s a comedian, not a political pundit."

Except no one is laughing – her Rosie Live! variety show was cancelled the first night after scoring an anemic 5.25 million viewers, though the presence of such hip, relevant and cutting edge guest artists as Alanis Morrissette and someone/something called "Ne-Yo" probably didn’t help.

The fact is that Rosie O’Donnell is an unpleasant, smug and actively dumb woman who is unlikely to garner anything like the following she once had before embracing her personal jihad against the most deeply held and sincere beliefs of a significant majority of the country. The stay at-home mommies I know are too busy to sit and watch television without a very good reason, and being bitched at by a sanctimonious harpy isn’t one of them. Oprah likes Barack Obama, but (I assume) she doesn’t spend an hour a day telling her audience that they are the scum of the Earth for not agreeing with her. Rosie probably couldn’t resist – and watching her show would probably make the Bataan Death March look like a week at Club Med.

So, there are two possible reasons behind the resurrection of Rosie as a daytime talk show hostess. The first is that the producers think they can make some money by harnessing what they believe to be her undeniable audience appeal. Perhaps that’s true, but that seems like a triumph of hope over recent experience considering the unbroken track record of audience alienation and failure that has haunted her since she left her original talk show back in 2002 as well as the increasing polarization of the American public into liberal and conservative camps. Does it seem smart to invest in a show that at the threshold flips the bird to at least 50% of the people who might be enticed to watch it?

The other possibility is that Rosie’s aggressive lefty political stance is a net positive for her backers, and that they believe she would provide a valuable, if only intermittently coherent, liberal voice in the vast wasteland that is daytime television. And they may be willing to suck up the potential losses in order to let that obnoxious voice be heard.

The truth is probably somewhere in between. It’s not unknown for Hollywood to try to mix business with leftism (*cough* The Green Zone *cough*). Of course, that doesn’t always work real well. (*cough* The Green Zone *cough*).

Will Rosie O’Donnell succeed with her career resurrection? No one can know for sure, but just in case, I’m keeping a crucifix and some garlic handy.

Originally published at Big Hollywood on March 31, 2010.

CNN’s Larry King, moderating a panel discussing the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal on his program on Tuesday, tossed softballs at noted anti-Catholic Sinead O’Connor, who recently pushed for Catholics to stop attending Mass. By contrast, King hostilely interrogated former Miss California USA Carrie Prejean in November 2009, to the point where she almost walked out of the interview.

The CNN host spent the second half of his 9 pm Eastern  program to the Church scandal, bringing on Sinead O’Connor, two Catholic priests, the Catholic League’s Bill Donahue, and former CNN anchor Thomas Roberts, a victim of sexual abuse by a Catholic priest when he was a teenager. After introducing his guests, King first turned to O’Connor and asked her about the previous segment, where he had interviewed two alleged victims of Father Lawrence Murphy, who was accused of molesting up to 200 deaf boys: "Did you hear the earlier guests talk about this, and what did you think about what they said?" Later, the anchor asked the Irish musician, "What do you think His Holiness [Pope Benedict XVI] should do?"

King would go on to give a false impression of O’Connor. He asked Roberts, "What do you make of all this? The Pope- do you go that high? You’re a victim. You’re the only victim here." The former CNN anchor tried to interject about O’Connor, and King replied, "Sinead is too- I’m sorry." That might lead one to believe that she was abused by a Catholic priest, but in her earlier interview with Anderson Cooper on Friday night, she flatly denied that this was the case: "I am a survivor of child abuse myself, not by clergy."

The host would go on to ask O’Connor two more questions. He again asked her about the Pope: "Sinead, what responsibility does the Pope have in this, do you believe?" Near the end of the program, King asked a final softball question: "Sinead, are you optimistic?"

On November 11, 2009, Carrie Prejean faced a much more hostile interview from the CNN personality, who, as the Culture and Media Institute’s Colleen Raezler pointed out, is "notorious for his softball celebrity interviews." King twice asked her about a sex video she taped for her boyfriend when she was still a teenager, and repeatedly pressed her about her settlement with Donald Trump’s Miss Universe organization, despite her insistence that it was a confidential matter. He also blindsided her by taking a call from a viewer who asked Prejean about her opposition to same-sex "marriage."

The leftist Southern Poverty Law Center is a National Public Radio staple in analyzing right-wing militia groups — and then connecting them to the Tea Party movement and conservative talk-show hosts.

Imagine a conservative group connecting liberal talk-show hosts and protesters to radical leftists like…Bill Ayers. Would they get a baldly promotional interview on NPR? No. But NPR Fresh Air hostess Terry Gross both aided the SPLC with a 37-minute promotional interview on March 25 – and aided Bill Ayers in trashing Sarah Palin days after the 2008 election.

NPR promoted SPLC’s Mark Potok and his narrative of "astounding" growth of militias in the Obama era thanks to "ostensibly mainstream" conservatives on All Things Considered on Tuesday night.

MICHELE NORRIS, co-host: Beyond immigration, what’s driving this? What accounts for that?

Mr. POTOK: Well, I think there are a number of things. The changing demographics of the country are extremely important, the idea that whites will lose their majority in the year 2050. Additionally, I think the economy has been very important as it gets worse and worse, at least for those people who are unemployed. There is simply more anger and frustration out there in the country and people are looking for explanations and a certain portion of them settle on these kinds of explanations.

The last thing I would say is that there has been really a, I think, kind of a vital role played by ostensibly mainstream politicians and certain commentators – in particular, commentators on cable news television shows. These people have in many instances helped to push into the mainstream absolutely groundless conspiracy theories and other ideas from the radical right.

You know, these are ideas that I think are wholly outside of the mainstream, or certainly ought to be, simply because they have no basis in reality. But the net effect of all of this is that people are very frightened out there. There are a number of people that the broad population views as leaders who are telling them things that are not true but are very scary.

Norris never asked him for specifics. But he did lay it out on NPR’s talk show Fresh Air, discussing Glenn Beck’s strange FEMA-trailer reporting. Host Terry Gross led her show with the Harris Poll that showed how many strange beliefs conservatives allegedly hold about Obama. She asked Potok:

GROSS: Now, where do you think these ideas are coming from, you know, like the birther idea, the idea that Obama’s like Hitler or that he’s a socialist or a communist, or worse yet, the Antichrist?

POTOK: Well, I think a lot of these ideas do originate on the radical right, but they are also being flogged endlessly by Republican officials. You know, even those who are considered sort of responsible Republicans have by and large completely abstained from any kind of criticism of this talk. So even way back when, when Sarah Palin was talking about Obama setting up death panels and so on, you know, what we heard was a deafening silence from the mainstream of the Republican Party.

Terry Gross was very defensive about President Obama:

GROSS: President Obama has been called a socialist, a communist. Democrats have been accused of staging a government takeover of our lives with health care reform, and I guess I’m wondering if you think that that kind of rhetoric connects at all with the extremist hate groups that you’ve been following.

Mr. POTOK: I do, because this idea of the government as a socialist entity, as a Marxist entity, I think very much originates in these far radical right circles.

After trashing the Minutemen, Gross and Potok turned to the Tea Parties, and Potok patronized them as victims of misinformation:

GROSS: Now, when you say youve heard racism in the Tea Party, are you talking about veiled things or overt statements? What are you talking about?

POTOK: Well, I think sometimes they are veiled – certainly the kind of Obama in white face, Obama as a witch doctor, and so on. You know, and then we get a little more right out there. You know, the idea of, you know, weve got a lion – African lion in the zoo, a lying African in the White House. You know, that kind of thing weve seen a lot of.

You know, another idea that is out there very strongly, I think, and very broadly, is the idea that violence is needed from time to time to defend the republic, so weve seen quite a lot of people either paraphrasing or wearing T-shirts paraphrasing the Thomas Jefferson quote about, you know, from time to time the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants. You know, I just think it is worth remembering that those are the very words that were on the back of Timothy McVeigh’s T-shirt on the day that he blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995.

GROSS: Now, the kind of language and the kind of signs that youre talking about, some people would say, look, these are extremist people who have hooked on to the Tea Party, it’s not representative of the leadership of the Tea Party or of the majority of people within the Tea Party.

POTOK: Well, I think that’s probably right. I think the Tea Party is a strange mix, but I think what is undeniably true is that you see these kinds of strains running through the Tea Party. I don’t think that you can describe the Tea Party as uniformly an extremist group or certainly a group that is racist, nor do I think it really is a group. I mean this is a fairly inchoate movement. They are lots and lots of elements. It’s hard to keep up with how it’s changing and developing.

But you know, at the end of the day, you know, once again, it was people in the Tea Party crowd who spat on a congressman, who used various racist and homophobic epithets over the weekend. And you know, I dont mean to say that those are all Tea Partiers. I dont think that’s true. I think many people in the Tea Party movement in fact are almost victims, are people who have been led to believe that, for instance, any kind of national health care will mean the death of their grandparents, will mean the loss of all kinds of health care and other things. So you know, I think people have been frightened, and that’s what you see a lot of, not only in the Tea Parties but in many of these other groups as well.

Gross harped on the Harris poll a second time as she wondered out loud about President Obama’s safety:

GROSS: The new Harris poll says that 45 percent of Republicans agree with the birthers and their belief that President Obama was not born in the United States and is therefore not eligible to be president. Thirty-eight percent say Obama’s doing many of the things that Hitler did. Twenty-four percent say he may be the Antichrist.

As somebody who monitors extremist groups and hate groups, how concerned are you about Obama’s safety with all of these beliefs that he’s doing things that Hitler did and he may be the Antichrist and he’s not really even our legal president?

Mr. POTOK: Well, I think Obama’s safety is a genuine concern. You know, as we well know now, he received Secret Service protection long before any other presidential candidate in our history, and that was right. It is worth remembering that while Obama was still a candidate, before he had even, you know, actually been elected, there were two different racist skinhead plots to assassinate him – one in Denver, one in Tennessee. These were admittedly half-baked plots, but it nevertheless only takes one person to get through.

NPR has made no attempt in or around these interviews to balance out Potok or allow a critic of SPLC to contradict him.

People with diabetes who undergo cancer surgery are more likely to die in the month following their operations than those who are not diabetic, researchers at Johns Hopkins University say.

The study, which will be published in the April issue of “Diabetes Care,” shows that cancer patients who also have Type 2 diabetes have a 50 percent greater risk of death after surgery.

“Diabetic patients, their oncologists and their surgeons should be aware of the increased risk when they have cancer surgery,” Hsin-Chieh “Jessica” Yeh, Ph.D., assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, said in a press release. “Care of diabetes before, during and after surgery is very important. It should be part of the preoperative discussion.

Although the researchers analyzed 15 previous studies, they could not pinpoint the reason the risk is increased. One reason could be infection, which increases in diabetics. Another could be complications that arise from the strain diabetes puts on the cardiovascular system.

To learn more about diabetes management, visit AOL Health.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Bringing his belittling commentary toward conservatives — disguised as comedy — to a wider audience, on Wednesday’s Tonight Show on NBC Bill Maher repeated some of the lines he’s spewed in recent weeks on his HBO show. Maher used the sexually-derogatory “tea baggers” term as he credited Tea Party activists for getting the health care bill passed:

I’m sure they’re saying, “What are you talking about, Bill? I was so against the health care bill, I marched on Washington with tea bags hanging from my hat, dressed up in my founding fathers costume with a picture of Hitler, you know, and Obama’s face on him and, you know, screaming about his birth certificate.” And America saw that and said: “What loons. We’re going with the calm black man.”

On Palin: “Sarah Palin screaming about death panels? You know what, Sarah, if we were killing off useless people, you’d be the first to know.”

(From late February: “Maher: ‘Brain-Dead’ Palin ‘a Babbling, Barely House-Broken, Uneducated Being’”)

From the Wednesday, March 31 Tonight Show with Jay Leno:

BILL MAHER: I thank the tea baggers….Any tea baggers here tonight? They’re the ones who got it passed. I’m sure they’re saying, “What are you talking about, Bill? I was so against the health care bill, I marched on Washington with tea bags hanging from my hat, dressed up in my founding father’s costume with a picture of Hitler, you know, and Obama’s face on him and, you know, screaming about his birth certificate.”

And America saw that and said: “What loons. We’re going with the calm black man.” [cheers and applause]

These idiots can’t even spell “go back to Kenya,” you know? Sarah Palin screaming about death panels? You know what, Sarah, if we were killing off useless people, you’d be the first to know. [cheers and applause]

JAY LENO: But now, the GOP are not giving up. Now they want to repeal this thing. They want to replace it with a a new one.

MAHER: Oh, they’re such sore losers. Sore losers. And I’m not just talking about the gunfire. I mean, you expect that from the right wing when they lose a a political battle. Of course, the bricks through the window, the death threats on phone machine you know? That’s all acceptable, you know? You have to throw a little tantrum when freedom, as we know it, dies because I know what it means to be a patriot, is to make sure that kids don’t get checkups.

With an increasing attempt by the left to paint Tea Party protestors as racist loons, it becomes of great importance to identify those who purport to represent conservative values, but in reality are nothing more than radical individuals. 

As NewsBusters has previously reported, liberal Web sites – particularly Talking Points Memo (TPM) and the Huffington Post – have continually cited the Tea Party links of one Dale Robertson.  Why?  Because he further promotes the concept of the tea partier as racist.  Robertson once demonstrated a level of racial ignorance that boggles the mind by being photographed with a sign reading "Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = N***ar".

But the reality is that Robertson has predominantly self-described links to the Tea Party movement, while legitimate factions of the movement have been trying to distance themselves from the man.  His claims of influence within the Tea Party have turned out to be mildly embellished.  Now, it turns out his web of tales is growing ever more tangled.

Tommy Christopher of Mediaite recently interviewed Robertson, in which he claims that the sign that made him famous for the wrong reasons was simply a fake.  As Mediaite reports:

"The misspelled n-word appears to have been duct-taped over the original sign, which Robertson claims read ‘Congress = Slaveowner, Taxpayer = Slave.’ He says he never taped anything over the original sign, nor did anyone else. He says the photo must be a fake."

This account is very different from an e-mail conversation (transcribed below) that I had with Mr. Robertson in early January.  The question of accuracy was posed a couple of different ways, most notably because I had originally believed myself that the image had to be a fake.  After all, I thought, nobody could be stupid enough to hold up a sign like that. 

However, in response to this question:

"Is the picture doctored to make the sign say that, or is it accurate?"

Robertson had this response:

"It is easy to take the mob mentality and make accusations.  This comment was taken from Webster Dictionary, from Ron Dellums a Liberal/Socialist Democrat.  It means politically unrepresented.  However, we are so interested in hating that we can’t see this is not referring to a person, but Americans in general.  In particularly, myself."

As you can see, Robertson never mentions that the original sign had supposedly used the alternate word ‘slave.’  While it may very well have been below the taped over sign, he is clearly referring to the more offending phrase.  In fact, he goes out of his way to defend use of the n-word by citing a dictionary reference.  Not to mention, the question clearly asked if the photo was doctored or faked, and Robertson responds in full explanation mode.  Had this image been faked, the response should flatly have been ‘yes, the image was altered’ or ‘no, that is not what the sign actually said’.

He further acknowledges the presence of the word on the sign by explaining why it was misspelled:

"The misspelling was intentional for the Educational Elite, who are vexed and gladly jump into the face of the less fortunate to proclaim we are idiots."

Why explain the misspelling at all if the photo was faked, and why have an explanation if someone else put the word there?

As Robertson states early on, "First of all I’m an enemy of both Major political parties."

More accurately, he is an enemy of common sense.

- Please join my page on Facebook.

>>> <XXXXXXXXXXXXX> 1/5/2010 12:58 PM >>>

Rusty, 

First of all I?m an enemy of both Major political parties. The submission was from a Republican operative who stole over $500K from the Tea Party Movement. The RNC knows who they are and chooses to enjoy the spoils of what I started. I?m not racist, but you would have to take the time to know me to know that.

It is easy to take the mob mentality and make accusations. This comment was taken from Webster Dictionary, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nigger, from Ron Dellums a Liberal/Socialist Democrat. It means politically unrepresented. However, we are so interested in hating that we can?t see this is not referring to a person, but Americans in general. In particularly, myself.

I adhere to Dr. Martin Luther King quote, ?Do not judge a man by the depth of his skin, but by the depth of his character.? I abhor racism. However, the political elite will use any method to divide to gain power. Go ahead call me racist, but that is a lie. I expect that my daughter who dates black men, will marry one. I do not look at his color, but his character.

The misspelling was intentional for the Educational Elite, who are vexed and gladly jump into the face of the less fortunate to proclaim we are idiots. Need I say more. We can continue to be manipulated by hate and lose our moral compass or rise above it and begin to listen to one another. We must stop hating and start listening to provide real solutions to our problems.

—–Original Message—–
From: Rusty Weiss
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2010 10:27 AM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: Sign

(XXX) XXX-XXXX

>>> <XXXXXXXXXXXXX> 1/5/2010 10:03 AM >>>

Rusty,

I’m a strait shooter and do not lie.  I’m curious why the radical right is not held to the same standard.  They can make accusations and attacks, while they reach into our pockets to rob us blindly.  I appreciate you honesty to let me know who you are.  I will discuss this topic with you later.  I have a few things to attend to myself.  Do you have a phone number?

Dale

—–Original Message—–
From: Rusty Weiss
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2010 09:58 AM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: Sign

Dale,

I do but will be in meetings on lunch, and am unable to talk until later this evening.  If you would like to contact me, use my email address at XXXXXXXXXX.  Also, if you’re wondering about the clothing I wear, feel free to check out my column on NewsBusters.  And if you don’t feel comfortable discussing, that is fine too.  I fully understand.  Thanks!

Rusty

>>> <XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX> 1/5/2010 9:52 AM >>>

Rusty,

Do you have a phone number?  You have to realize that I have to be cautious about wolves in sheep clothing.  Not to say that you are a wolf.

Dale

—–Original Message—–
From: Rusty Weiss
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2010 08:19 AM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: Sign

I fully believe that.  But is the picture doctored to make the sign say that, or is it accurate.  Believe me when I say I am a fan of the Tea Party movement, so if it is inaccurate, I would like to point out how some sites are falsely accusing you of this.

Rusty

>>> <XXXXXXXXXXXXX> 1/4/2010 11:43 PM >>>

Rusty,

This is driven by a group who wants to be divisive.  My daughter dates black people all the time and I full expect to have a black son-in-law.  I do not see the difference in skin color.  I agree with Dr. Martin Luther King, "Not to Judge a Man by the depth of his skin, but to judge by the depth of his Character".  These people have a reason to cause division and I rather not entertain their attempt to malign this movement.

Dale

P.S. I have an even amount of white, black and hispanic friends.  I was blessed with a multi-cultural school and never viewed my classmates through the lens of hatred or racism, but look at each other as a brother or sister.

—–Original Message—–
From: Rusty Weiss

Sent: Monday, January 4, 2010 03:27 PM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Sign

Do you have a picture of the actual sign, as this has clearly been altered.

Thanks.

Rusty