If your income tax rate stays the same next year, would you consider that a “tax cut”? ABC anchor Diane Sawyer sure seems to think so. Adopting the Obama/Democratic spin as fact, that maintaining the same income tax rates in place since 2003 constitutes a “tax cut,” even though taxpayers would pay the same amount on the same income, she led Wednesday’s ABC World News:

It will be the big battle to the finish line in November, and this is the question: How big a tax cut will you get next year?

In her very text sentence, however, she incongruently, but accurately, recognized Obama’s wish to return rates for some to their pre-2003 level would constitute a hike: “And should taxes increase on the wealthiest Americans?”

The subsequent story dealt only with Obama v Republicans on income tax rates for 2011, and a FICA tax cut is off the political table, so Sawyer must have been talking about the income tax, not any FICA rate change.

Sawyer’s no rate change equals a tax cut thinking matches the reasoning from liberals who fret over the “cost” and “paying for” continuing the rates set in 2003, as if all the money in the economy is the government’s, and so not letting the Bush tax cut rates expire – maintaining the status quo – means a “tax cut.”

Sawyer opened the Wednesday, September 8 World News:

Good evening. It will be the big battle to the finish line in November, and this is the question: How big a tax cut will you get next year? And should taxes increase on the wealthiest Americans? We have an exclusive interview with the President tonight. He walked into the lion’s den today, challenging Republicans on taxes and the economy. The Republicans, quick to fire back.

That interview with President Obama amounted to an Obama soundbite from an interview conducted by George Stephanopoulos which will run on Thursday’s Good Morning America.

Cenk Uygur (pronounced Jenk You-gurr) is profiled by media reporter James Rainey in Wednesday’s Los Angeles Times, and it becomes quite clear the exotically-named Young Turks radio host could be the next leftist star at MSNBC. Since his friendship with Dylan Ratigan led to some guest-hosting gigs (in which he bested Ratigan in the ratings), Uygur is now part of the "family" of Bush-hating radicals:

Cable executives hope fill-in hosts can at best hold on to the audiences they inherit. But MSNBC insiders said they believe Uygur did so well because many of those who watch his three-hour weekday Web program, (3 to 6 p.m. PDT) or clips on his YouTube channel jumped to MSNBC when Ratigan was out….

MSNBC President Phil Griffin called Uygur “part of our family” and expects him to get “more and more” air time, though he declined to specify in what time slots.

Inside Cable News guesses it wouldn’t be any place in day time (might they dump the Hardball rerun at 7?) Or they could do an MSNBC version of  Red Eye in late night? In any case, Cenk wants to be seen on Obama’s left:

"Obama spent the first two years of his administration practicing political unilateral disarmament," he said in one salvo. "He laid down his arms to reach out to Republicans, and they ripped his arms off and clubbed him over the head with them."

Uygur has also offered these oddball utterances:

Unlike Fox, MSNBC is "straight news."

He made this case with a straight face: "Is there a chance that Obama is actually more conservative than Reagan?"

Days later, he added this Obama dismissal: "I didn’t realize we elected a Republican president."

As a Republican electoral wave approaches, the Tea Party is the "cancer of the Republican Party."

Most recently, he asked, "What black person, gay guy or girl, immigrant or Muslim-American in their right mind would vote for the Republican party? They might as well hang a sign around their neck saying I hate myself."

Eventually, MSNBC is going to be just wall-to-wall leftist wailers, many of them from failed talk-radio shows.

CNN’s Deborah Feyerick played up Imam Feisal Rauf’s apparent credentials as a "moderate" Muslim during a report on Wednesday’s American Morning. Feyerick omitted using sound bites from Rauf’s critics, and only briefly mentioned his controversial remarks about on CBS’s 60 Minutes about the 9/11 attacks and his reluctance to condemn Hamas.

The CNN correspondent’s report led the 6 am Eastern hour, and was re-broadcast throughout the day on the network. Almost immediately, Feyerick stressed how Rauf is apparently a "voice of moderation" by playing three clips from three who unequivocally endorse him- the State Department’s P. J. Crowley, mosque developer Sharif El-Gamal, and Professor John Esposito of Georgetown University. She continued by describing the Islamic cleric as a "Sufi Muslim, at the other end of the Islamic spectrum from the radical theology that feeds groups like al Qaeda."

After two further sound bites from Esposito, who gushed over Imam Rauf, Feyerick highlighted his background: "According to his biography, Feisal Abdul Rauf was born in Kuwait in 1948 into an Egyptian family steeped in religious scholarship. In 1997, he founded the non-profit American Society for Muslim Advancement- its mission, described on its website, as ’strengthening an authentic expression of Islam based on cultural and religious harmony through interfaith collaboration, youth, and women’s empowerment.’"

The correspondent didn’t bring up Rauf’s controversial past until the end of her report, and almost as an after-thought: "He was criticized after 9/11 for saying U.S. support of oppressive regimes was partly responsible for the attacks, but maintained his remarks on 60 Minutes had been taken out of context. Rauf supports Israel’s right to exist, but says as a bridge builder, he can’t condemn radical Palestinian group Hamas as terrorists." Overall, Feyerick played six clips in favor of the imam, and none critical of him. She didn’t even quote from any specific critic of his.

Feyerick has been on a roll, as of late, with her recent one-sided reporting on the Ground Zero mosque and related "Islamophobia" issues. On August 26, she advanced the theory that the stabbing of Muslim taxicab driver in New York City may have been "connected to this big Ground Zero controversy, where we’re hearing so much anti-Muslim sentiment." Exactly a week later, on September 2, the CNN correspondent continued her network’s promotion of the charge that "Islamophobia" is a growing phenomenon inside the U.S.

The full transcript of Deborah Feyerick’s report from Wednesday’s American Morning:

FEYERICK (voice-over): If you have never heard him speak, this is what Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has to say.

IMAM FEISAL ABDUL RAUF: The major theme in Islam is the oneness of God, and that we should worship one God- love and adore the one God.

FEYERICK: People who know Imam Feisal say he’s a voice of moderation. The State Department-

STATE DEPARTMENT ASSISTANT SECRETARY P. J. CROWLEY: His work on tolerance and religious diversity is well known.

FEYERICK: The developer of the controversial Islamic center near Ground Zero.

SHARIF EL-GAMAL: He is somebody who has sacrificed his life to building bridges within communities.

FEYERICK: Islamic scholar and university professor John Esposito.

FEYERICK (on-camera): How would you describe him? Is he a threat?

JOHN ESPOSITO, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: Feisal is, from my point of view- he is ‘Mr. Mellow.’

FEYERICK (voice-over): Imam Feisal is a Sufi Muslim, at the other end of the Islamic spectrum from the radical theology that feeds groups like al Qaeda.

ESPOSITO: He approaches Islam spiritually. He is a Sufi in background, which means one pursues, if you will, a more, kind of, spiritual mystical path. He’s somebody who would find terrorism and religious extremism as abhorrent. He’s run a mosque in this area for years and years and years.

FEYERICK: That mosque, the Masjid al-Farah, is 10 blocks from Ground Zero, and has co-existed peacefully in the Tribeca neighborhood for 28 years.

ESPOSITO: He has integrated himself into the community.

FEYERICK: According to his biography, Feisal Abdul Rauf was born in Kuwait in 1948 into an Egyptian family steeped in religious scholarship. In 1997, he founded the non-profit American Society for Muslim Advancement- its mission, described on its website, as ’strengthening an authentic expression of Islam based on cultural and religious harmony through interfaith collaboration, youth, and women’s empowerment.’

Several years later, Rauf founded the Cordoba Institute to improve relations between the Muslim world and the West, writing how American Muslims can help bridge the divide. The State Department noticed, sending him as a cultural ambassador on four trips to the Middle East, most recently this summer.

GRAEME BANNERMAN, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: They try to get people who reflect the best aspects of American society.

FEYERICK: Rauf is often asked to speak at meetings like the World Economic Forum in Davos. He was criticized after 9/11 for saying U.S. support of oppressive regimes was partly responsible for the attacks, but maintained his remarks on 60 Minutes had been taken out of context. Rauf supports Israel’s right to exist, but says as a bridge builder, he can’t condemn radical Palestinian group Hamas as terrorists. As for the proposed Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero, he says that, too, is about bridges.

RAUF: This is also our expression of the 99.999 percent of Muslims all over the world, including in America, who have condemned and continue to condemn terrorism. This is about our stand as the Muslim community, which has been part of this community.

FEYERICK: But right now, this moderate Muslim cleric finds himself at the eye of a storm. Deborah Feyerick, CNN, New York.

"Top Chef" judge Tom Colicchio rang alarm bells about child obesity on MSNBC’s "Morning Joe" Wednesday, saying it is now a "national health crisis." Colicchio warned that the recent Senate school lunch legislation did not go "far enough" and that access to healthy school meals needs to be increased for kids to save future health care costs.

"It’s a pretty good bill, but I don’t think it goes far enough," the chef complained of the school lunch bill. "They need to increase access for kids."

"After-school programs, after-school periods, breakfast programs, weekend programs, summer programs – those aren’t included in the Senate bill; they’re included in the House bill," Colicchio mused. "Obesity has become a national health crisis." He said the problem poses "billions" of dollars in future health care costs if it will not be addressed properly.

"Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski, a nutrition-warrior herself, agreed and argued that obese children need to be viewed as victims – as children "whose future is cut short before it even starts."

"They’ve got nothing, because their health is always in jeopardy, their life will be shortened, their options will be limited," Mika lamented.  

Both Mika and Colicchio chose the "malnourished" label for obese children, and Mika lauded the FDA food guidelines at restaurants, movie theaters and grocery stores as a step in the right direction.

"Obesity is actually malnutrition. It’s not overeating. It’s malnourishment," argued Colicchio.

A transcript of the segment, which aired on September 8 at 8:41 a.m. EDT, is as follows:

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And joining us now, the lead judge for "Top Chef," Tom Kilickio, who is here to discuss the school lunch legislation in front of Congress, which is making its way – maybe not perfect –

TOM COLICCHIO, Judge, "Top Chef": Well, the Senate passed the bill.

BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.

COLICCHIO: And It’s a pretty good bill, but I don’t think it goes far enough.

BRZEZINSKI: Yeah?

COLICCHIO: Yeah. There’s a couple of – a couple issues with it. One, they need to increase access for kids. And so, automatic enrollment through Medicaid is something that the House bill is putting forth. After-school programs, after-school ___ periods, breakfast programs, weekend programs, summer programs – those aren’t included in the Senate bill, they’re included in the House bill. The other, sort of, big issue is that the Senate bill, even though it’s a good bill, they’re taking 2 billion dollars from SNAP program. So essentially, they’re stealing from dinner to pay for lunch. And, you know, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. The House bill, it’s an 8 billion dollar bill over ten years, and they said they’ll find the offsets to make it work.

BRZEZINSKI: You know, if anyone wants to understand why this is important, and why we need to do this, and many other things – take a look at New York. Take a look at the kids in New York. And the numbers that we saw in the headlines over the weekend, in terms of obese children. And, especially in poor areas, and in poorer areas there are many more. And… there are 51 percent in Queens, it’s unbelievable.

COLICCHIO: Queens, the Bronx, but also rural areas too. Places like Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas – you know, obesity has become a national health crisis.

BRZEZINSKI: Yes.

COLICCHIO: And talk about saving money on health care. This will save dividends down the road, if we take care of this problem now. This is going to cost us billions of dollars in health care, if they don’t take care of this.

MIKE BARNACLE: Did you say that one of the bills, the Senate bill not the House bill, doesn’t include breakfast for school kids?

COLICCHIO: No, it includes breakfast. Well, no, it doesn’t include breakfast. And it also does not include weekend feeding and summer months. You know, hunger doesn’t go away in the summer. It’s still there.

BARNACLE: Well no. If you look at those numbers – 51 percent obesity in Queens, 12 percent on the Upper West Side – if you look at the kids at the bus stop, the kids on the way to school, I’ll tell you what they have for breakfast. They have a fish sandwich and a big O from McDonalds on their way to school, and their day calorically health-wise is on the way down.

BRZEZINSKI: Oh God.

COLICCHIO: Well that’s the biggest problem right now. You talk about obesity. Obesity is actually malnutrition. It’s not overeating. It’s malnourishment. And so, there’s, there was a study done – in the summer months, children are putting on weight now. Which you’d think the opposite, you’d think they’re more active. But no, they’re putting on more weight, and the reason being is when they’re in school programs, they were getting breakfast and they were getting lunch. They were getting more nutritious meals, they were not just getting empty calories and fat and sugar.

BRZEZINSKI: And you know, I get criticism for how staunch I can be on this topic, but when you look at a child who is obese, you look at a child whose future is cut short before it even starts. They’ve got nothing, because their health is always in jeopardy, their life will be shortened, their options will be limited. And now we have classrooms with more children who are obese than children who are not. And I don’t know why – I even got reactions on Twitter saying "Don’t use the word ‘obese,’ you’re marginalizing people," or "You’re adding to the hatred." And I’m thinking we need to use the word, we need to address this.

COLICCHIO: Let’s call them "malnourished," because they are.

BRZEZINSKI: They are malnourished children, whose futures are being cut short. Now we have other things that have happened. Recently the FDA put out these calorie count guidelines – grocery stores, movie theatres, trains, airlines – everyone’s trying to potentially get into it to give people a sense of what they’re eating, not just children, adults. What more can be done – I guess my question to you, as a restaurant-eur, and on "Top Chef" restaurants – do they have a responsibility here to make food that’s better, that’s more nutritional?

COLICCHIO: Well, if you’re talking about the kind of restaurants that I have, that are sort of high-end restaurants, we’re using whole ingredients, we’re not buying canned food or processed food – so we’re already putting healthy food on the table. But it’s the fast food restaurants that you have to worry about. That’s where the majority of the people are actually getting their food from these days. And so those are the restaurants –

ADRIANNA HUFFINGTON: But I’d say the fast food restaurants, and also the production of food.– I mean, what kind of cooperation are you getting from the kind of manufacturers that produce so highly-processed food, that that’s where the malnourishment that you are talking about occurs?

COLICCHIO: Well you’re right, and I think the biggest problem though is we’re subsidizing the worst foods for us. And that seems to make them cheap, like sugar, and corn for high fructose corn syrup – those are the things that we’re subsidizing at the risk of our health. And that’s why these products are cheap, because they’re being subsidized, and that’s why people with low incomes can afford them. But they’re the wrong foods to feed our children.

BRZEZINSKI: We all need to try and get our arms around this.

Yes, you read that headline right.

Larry Flynt, the outspoken publisher of the men’s magazine "Hustler," is advocating equal rights for women.

Even better, the real punch line in his Huffington Post piece was that he blamed the failure of the 1970s Equal Rights Amendment on feminist stalwart Gloria Steinem.

Readers are strongly cautioned to keep fluids out of their mouths and away from their computers for the duration:

I have long believed the reason the ERA didn’t pass back then is that Gloria Steinem co-opted the debate about women’s rights, approaching it from a New York point of view rather than a national one. Saying things like "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle" and "A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after," not to mention "make him sleep on the wet spot," didn’t go over well with women in the Midwest who considered themselves feminists but still wanted to be mothers. If there is one person to blame for the failure of the ERA to pass, it’s Ms. Steinem. 

With that on the table, Flynt called for the ERA to be proposed once again in Congress.

"Surely without the ill-advised, self-serving rhetoric of Ms. Steinem, reason can prevail."

Actually, with the current state of the economy, any future ERA might have to be to protect men and not women, as this recession has been far harder on male workers than female employees.

The unemployment rate for men stands at 10.6 percent; it’s only 8.6 percent for women.

Beyond this, recent college trends have shown far more women seeking higher education.

But let’s not allow such inconvenient truths to get in the way of the entertainment value of Flynt’s proposal, or what Steinem wrote about the smutty publisher in 1997.

Enjoy. 

Vanity Fair writer Michael Joseph Gross has already admitted to one error in his profile of Sarah Palin, but the contradictions and controversies surrounding his hit piece continue to stack up.

In a Sept. 7 post on The Corner, Katrina Trinko "refudiated" Gross’s characterization of Palin as vicious, vengeful, and fake. Unlike Gross’s sources, almost all of which were anonymous, Trinko provided citations.

Gross had cited "people who know" suggesting Palin’s relationship with close friends Kristan Cole and Kris Perry had "deteriorated." But Cole reportedly told Trinko the charge was "absolutely not true. I don’t know where they get this stuff from, honestly."

A former Palin aide, Ivy Frye, also contradicted Gross’s characterization that she parted ways with Palin "on bad terms." "I didn’t leave on ‘bad terms,’" she said in a statement. "Gross’ 8 page hit piece is a complete work of fiction from beginning to end."

Gross recently admitted to misreporting the profile’s opening story – in which he had originally suggested Palin was using her son, Trig, who has Down syndrome, to gain political sympathy. The child he’d seen was the son of Palin’s friend Gina Loudon. "This was a mistake, and I regret the error," Gross wrote in a statement.

But the story posted on Vanity Fair’s website makes no note of the retraction. The original storyappears unedited.

Gross had previously defended his work by telling MSNBC "Morning Joe" hosts that, "I have a lot in common with this woman." Elsewhere in his "Morning Joe" interview, Gross also called Palin "a person for whom there is no topic too small to lie about" and said, "She lies  about everything." Maybe they’re not so different after all.

Like this article? Sign up for "Culture Links," CMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter, byclicking here.

To many, it’s hardly a revelation to most, but when someone keeps taking the same action over and over again, even to his detriment, it can reveal a lot about that individual’s belief system.

This was an observation CNBC "Squawk Box" host Joe Kernen made about the Obama administration’s willingness to embrace a populist "soak the rich" tactic against the wealthy in the United States, even though it isn’t winning him favor with the American people, according to opinion polling. A new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows more people now think President Barack Obama’s policies have hurt the economy than have helped. And Kernen called the unwillingness to change course evidence of the president’s ideology – proof he does believe in the redistribution of wealth.

"When push comes to shove, the left wins out with this guy," Kernen said on the Sept. 8 broadcast of "Squawk Box." "Axelrod calls the shots when push comes to shove. And this will make the case for a populist argument that these rich people – soak the rich – they do not need this and we’re going to cut for the middle class and we’re going to pay for it by soaking the rich. And it’s right down – but it also – he said it all along, but to his critics, those critics, it’s more evidence of a redistribution that when it all comes down to it, the overriding mandate of this administration – it’s a redistribution of wealth." 

And even Kernen’s "Squawk Box" co-host Carl Quintanilla said it was obvious this wasn’t working.

"If that strategy had worked since he came into office – talking down Wall Street, scolding businesses, fat cats – his poll numbers would be higher," Quintanilla added. "So the question is, why isn’t he adjusting?"

But Kernen says it’s deeper than just a soak-the-rich philosophy for the sake of short-term political expediency, but that this is a belief Obama has held for decades.

"Because I think he really believes that wealth needs to be redistributed after the income disparity over the past 30 years," Kernen said. "I really think he believes and he’ll forego some near-term job gains and every thing else."

In his first column for The New York Times on Sept. 7, Peter Orszag, Obama’s former director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, suggested that Obama should reconsider his administration’s stance on allowing the Bush tax cuts expire. Moody’s economist Mark Zandi, an expert the Obama administration had relied on heavily in 2009 to get the stimulus passed, also has questioned the administration’s wisdom. And even a Times Sept. 8 story, which are traditionally sympathetic to Obama’s causes, was also doubtful he could prevail, as Kernen pointed out.

"It’s so obvious – even Orszag can figure that out," Kernen continued. "Even Zandi – just about everyone can figure out that you don’t try to stimulate at the same time you’re sucking money out of the economy. It makes no sense. But even The New York Times – ‘It’s not clear that Mr. Obama can prevail given his,’ and this is The New York Times, ‘given his own diminishing popularity the tepid economic recovery and the divisions within his own party.’ It says a lot of nervous Democrats wish that he would give them some cover and say, all right, maybe we’ll …"

Tuesday’s Washington Post offered this study tidbit: "President Obama received far more favorable coverage from Arab television networks than on American newscasts during the first 18 months of his term."

Academics Stephen Farnsworth, Robert Lichter, and and Roland Schatz found the coverage on five Arab networks (including al-Jazeera and al-Arabiyah) was 7.9 percent more positive than negative, compared to  2.6 percent more positive on European networks and 7.9 percent more negative on the ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox evening newscasts.

"Reporting on the president’s character was a major part of international news reports on Obama, and was an area where Obama was highly regarded," the study proclaims.

Obama’s coverage was less positive in the first six months of 2010, but the disparity remained: 4 percent more negative than positive on the Arab networks, compared to 6.5 percent more negative in Europe, and 12 percent more negative on American TV news.

The authors evaluated almost 77,000 statements and submitted their findings to the American Political Science Association. Those statements included evaluations by journalists as well as  experts, regular Americans, and partisans on both sides.

“Anti-Muslim bigotry is a problem, but it is only exacerbated by the media’s tendency to exaggerate and sensationalize it,” the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto observed Wednesday in looking at the media’s focus on the threat, to burn Qur’ans, by one widely condemned Florida pastor with barely a few dozen followers. On Wednesday night, for the second night in a row, two of the three broadcast network evening news shows led with Terry Jones (ABC and CBS on Tuesday, CBS and NBC on Wednesday.)

But what I found amusing is how network journalists decided Sarah Palin, the Pope – and even Pat Robertson – are now sources of wisdom worth publicizing. Over aerial video of the Vatican (screen capture below), Katie Couric teased the CBS Evening News: “Tonight, despite condemnation from the Vatican and a personal plea from Muslims, that Christian minister in Florida is going ahead with plans to burn copies of the Qur’an.”

“This is the news,” an excited Diane Sawyer announced on ABC, “not only is Billy Graham’s son Franklin trying to reach out to him, so is Sarah Palin.” Terry Moran relayed how “late today, Sarah Palin tweeted her opposition, writing: ‘Please stand down.’ And long-time televangelist Pat Robertson blasted Pastor Jones this morning.”

In the second of two reports at the top of the NBC Nightly News, Andrea Mitchell touted how “the Florida pastor even got the Vatican’s attention” and aired a clip of a Vatican spokesman declaring: “This act would only call for new hate and violence.” Mitchell concluded by approvingly paraphrasing a political figure normally the object of journalistic scorn: “Sarah Palin has now tweeted that Pastor Jones should please stand down, that people have a right to burn a Qur’an but that it is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation that will feed the fire.”

Palin’s tweet: “Koran Burning Is Insensitive, Unnecessary; Pastor Jones, Please Stand Down”

Back to ABC’s World News, Terry Moran saw sinister views of Islam held by Americans, but failed to point out attitudes have held steady for years and are not spiking:

Still, Jones vows to go forward, convinced he speaks for many Americans. A brand new ABC News poll confirms some disturbing facts. 26 percent of Americans admit to feelings of prejudice against Muslims and only 54 percent of Americans see Islam as a peaceful religion. 31 percent say mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims.

In reciting the same numbers online, however, ABC News polling chief Gary Langer added a crucial fact which undermines the implication that negative views of Islam are growing:

Just 54 percent call Islam a peaceful religion, while a substantial minority, 31 percent, thinks mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims. This view has held steady since 2003, after doubling from 2002.

From the WSJ’s online “Best of the Web Today” for September 8, a perceptive take from James Taranto:

…Anti-Muslim bigotry is a problem, but it is only exacerbated by the media’s tendency to exaggerate and sensationalize it – and by the adversarial and snobbish attitude many journalists and some politicians have adopted toward the vast majority of Americans, who are not bigoted and who see the Ground Zero mosque as an affront.

The obnoxious pastor and the obnoxious media have a confluence of interests here. It is no credit to the latter that their behavior has been no worse than that of the former.

Sawyer set up Moran’s September 8 story:

The chorus of voices grew louder today denouncing that Florida pastor who plans to burn the Qur’an on Saturday, the anniversary of 9/11. And, as we told you last night, Terry Jones’ church has only a couple of dozen members, but tonight, this is the news: Not only is Billy Graham’s son Franklin trying to reach out to him, so is Sarah Palin. And, we have a new poll showing what Americans really think and know about Islam. Here’s Terry Moran.
….

TERRY MORAN: Late today, Sarah Palin tweeted her opposition, writing: “Please stand down.” And long-time televangelist Pat Robertson blasted Pastor Jones this morning.

PAT ROBERTSON: Imagine a pastor that is so egotistical that he would sacrifice the lives of missionaries and soldiers to go forward with something. This is so stupid.

CBS Evening News, September 8:

After Couric’s tease quoted above (“Tonight, despite condemnation from the Vatican and a personal plea from Muslims, that Christian minister in Florida is going ahead with plans to burn copies of the Qur’an”), she related in her opening: “And the Vatican said quote, “This act would only call for new hate and violence.’”

For the record, here are the first and fourth sentences from the Federal Reserve’s Beige Book released earlier this afternoon:

Reports from the twelve Federal Reserve Districts suggested continued growth in national economic activity during the reporting period of mid-July through the end of August, but with widespread signs of a deceleration compared with preceding periods.

… However, the remaining Districts of New York, Philadelphia, Richmond, Atlanta, and Chicago all highlighted mixed conditions or deceleration in overall economic activity.

It may be fair to describe the detail in Atlanta’s section of the report as "mixed" (it’s a borderline call; the opening paragraph from that District’s report will appear later). But Richmond’s section is clearly one of deceleration, which brings us to today’s clearly needed geography lesson for Jeannine Aversa and/or a headline writer at the Associated Press.

What follows is a graphic containing the headline at Aversa’s 2:45 p.m. story (since updated here), and her first few paragraphs:

That’s clever.

By isolating slower growth to the "East" and "Midwest" (really "decelerating," a somewhat stronger term that implies a trend of ever-slower growth instead of a onetime event), the AP’s headline writer would appear to be attempting to limit the full brunt of the Beige Book’s relatively bad news. The fact is that the declining Richmond District includes Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia, many of whose non-DC Beltway residents would be surprised to learn are considered "East" by the AP’s headline writer.

The opening paragraph about Atlanta is mixed, but contrary to the AP’s communicated geography, some of the bad news is neither in the "East" nor the "East Coast," no matter how far you try to stretch the definition (bold is mine):

Sixth District business contacts indicated that the pace of economic activity continued to slow in July and August. Retailers reported a decrease in traffic and sales, and their outlook was less positive than in previous months. Reports from the District’s tourism sector were mixed as contacts outside of the oil-spill affected Gulf coast experienced positive growth, but areas from Louisiana to the Florida panhandle saw significant declines in visitors. Residential real estate contacts noted that the pace of new and existing home sales slowed, and their outlook remained pessimistic. Nonresidential real estate activity remained weak. Manufacturers reported that the pace of new orders growth slowed. Banking credit conditions remained constrained and loan demand was reportedly weak. Labor markets improved modestly, but most businesses maintained a strong preference for increasing the hours worked of existing staff and expanding their use of temporary hires rather than for hiring permanent employees. Transportation and material prices rose slightly, but most firms expressed limited ability to pass increases through to consumers. 

The bolded item would seem to indicate that contacts actually in the Gulf didn’t see growth in the tourism sector. That would include Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, none of which have recently been known to be located in "the East" or "East Coast."

Additionally, the two tidbits that follow in Atlanta’s section of the report allude to other forms of deceleration occurring in those decidedly non-"Eastern" states:

• "areas from Louisiana to the Florida panhandle saw significant declines in visitors."
• "Most District merchants reported that traffic and sales decreased in July and August."

Jeannine Aversa would have been better off simply publishing the first four sentences of the Beige Book and going home. A public attempting to stay informed would have been better off with a headline reading "Fed releases Beige Book, identifying regional economic trends."

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.