The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for June 19th, 2009

ABC Doing Special on Obama’s Health Care Proposal but……

Posted by iusbvision on June 19, 2009

Instead of hosting the special from ABC’s studio, the White House is giving ABC space to do the entire special from the White House. Normally an appearance of a conflict of interest would prevent a news network from doing that.

Via Matt Drudge:

Wed Jun 17 2009 15:15:00 ET

ABC is refusing to air paid ads during its White House health care presentation, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, including a paid-for alternative viewpoint!

The development comes a day after the network denied a request by the Republican National Committee to feature a representative of the party’s views during the Obama special.

Conservatives for Patients Rights requested the rates to buy a 60-second spot immediately preceding ‘Prescription for America’.

Statement from Rick Scott, chairman of Conservatives for Patients Rights:

“It is unfortunate – and unusual – that ABC is refusing to accept paid advertising that would present an alternative viewpoint for the White House health care event. Health care is an issue that touches every American and all potential pieces of legislation have carried a pricetag in excess of $1 trillion of taxpayers’ money. The American people deserve a healthy, robust debate on this issue and ABC’s decision – as of now – to exclude even paid advertisements that present an alternative view does a disservice to the public. Our organization is more than willing to purchase ad time on ABC to present an alternative viewpoint and our hope is that ABC will reconsider having such viewpoints be part of this crucial debate for the American people. We were surprised to hear that paid advertisements would not be accepted when we inquired and we would certainly be open to purchasing time if ABC would reconsider.”

Posted in Chuck Norton, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Brokaw Gives Fluff Interview to Obama, Obama Appoints Brokaw to a Presidential Commission.

Posted by iusbvision on June 19, 2009

Matt Drudge was first with this story but since we have always had a focus on journalism it is important for us to have the story covered. Brokaw was appointed to this presidential Commission.

White House Press release:


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                     June 17, 2009

CONTACT: Cindy Moelis, Director
(202) 395-4522

President Obama Announces Appointments to the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships
Washington, DC – Today, President Obama appointed 28 members to the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships. This accomplished group of citizens representing a broad range of backgrounds, interests, and professions are responsible for recommending a group of exceptional men and women to the President for selection as White House Fellows. The commission will be chaired by John Phillips, a partner at Phillips and Cohen Law Firm. Cheryl Dorsey, President of Echoing Green, will vice-chair the commission.  A full list of commissioners and their biographies can be found below.

Here is the interview.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Another case where Sotomayor virtually ignored the key legal arguments and ruled how she wished.

Posted by iusbvision on June 19, 2009

Much like what happened in Ricci case where Judge Sotomayor ignored the legal arguments at hand to the point where a Clinton appointed judge protested in this case Sotomayor ignored the case law and main argument in a brief regarding FOIA request.

The excerpt below is from the Colombia Journalism Review (CJR). I read CJR and while they maintain that it is all about journalism, it without question has a strong affinity to the far left point of view on most issues, but when you step on a reporters toes as Sotomayor did, partisan attachments go out the window.


“I was about ten, fifteen seconds into my argument when she interrupted with her first question,” remembers Wood. According to Wood’s recollection, Sotomayor first asked Wood if he was contending that the memo had to be released because it may have recommended declining prosecution—the same action the government chose. (CJR was unable to obtain a transcript of the session.)

“Basically she asked me a leading question that invited me to misstate the law,” says Wood. His brief hadn’t made that claim; instead, it contended that the memo may be eligible for release because it laid out the reasons adopted by the eventual decision, a point which Wood says he was able to make in court.

Over the course of questioning, Wood came to believe that Sotomayor wasn’t familiar with his arguments as presented in his brief. “I didn’t expect she’d read the whole thing, but she didn’t even read the parts of the brief she was interested in.”

As unhappy as he may have been during oral argument, Wood was even more dissatisfied when, in December 2005, the three judge panel issued its ruling, written by Sotomayor. His key piece of evidence that further discovery was warranted to determine if the memo had been expressly adopted, the Attorneys’ Manual, was dismissed in a footnote. Sotomayor didn’t quote the manual, and instead offered a paraphrase that made no mention of what Wood contends was the most important part.

“I think the omission of any reference to the language ‘and the reasons therefore’ in that footnote is intellectually dishonest,” Wood explains. “I think Judge Sotomayor and her colleagues owed it to me to at least acknowledge the existence of my main piece of evidence that this memo was adopted as the rationale for the decision to decline prosecution.”

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »