Rudy Giuliani

Latest news on rudy giuliani

Janet Napolitano as Homeland Security chief? "We could do worse"

Reason's David Weigel thinks Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano (rumored to be Obama's pick) wouldn't be a bad choice for Secretary of Homeland Security. My favorite part of Weigel's piece is his assessment of Rudy Giuliani: I think history has already forgotten Battlin' Bernie Kerik, the laughably corrupt and mobbed-up cop whom Rudy Giuliani commended to George W. Bush as a great replacement for Ridge. Kerik's nomination caught fire like styrofoam in a microwave, and we as a nation got the first clue that Giuliani had been replaced at some point in 2001-2004 by a strange, bald cyborg that needed to recharge batteries by making inopportune phone calls to its "wife." Dammit, Janet, I Love You...

Michael Tomasky on the key moments of the US election

One of the most famous New Yorker cartoons of all time shows two men in 19th-century garb, one sitting behind a desk and clearly a boss of some sort, the other in the boss's guest chair leaning anxiously forward. The boss is speaking. Caption: "I wish you would make up your mind, Mr Dickens. Was it the best of times or was it the worst of times? It could scarcely have been both."The cartoon is memorable because it skewers the pedantry behind the demand for neat categories. Life, as Dickens suggested, is always both. And so is politics. Without further ado then, some nominees for the best and worst of the campaign just concluded.Best speechOthers may be better known, but Barack Obama's thunderous oration at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner on November 10 2007 was a turning point. He was stuck in neutral, and Hillary Clinton looked inevitable. Then he tore the roof off the place. Remember, if he'd lost the Iowa caucuses, he may well have been forced out of the contest. The momentum that led to his Iowa victory began that night.Worst pre-campaign political decision with the benefit of hindsightHillary Clinton's vote for the Iraq war. She couldn't have known how badly the war would go of course. But if she'd voted against it, it's entirely possible that Obama never even would have run in the first place. Being the only top-level candidate against the war was his chief selling point to Democratic primary voters. Worst candidate Many conservatives predicted that Republican Fred Thompson would unite the party and be the answer to their prayers when he entered the race in mid-2007. Instead he always looked like he was wondering "God, when will this be over?" He once even refused to don a firefighter's hat for a photo-op, saying "I've got a silly hat rule." Earth to Fred: hats that people wear when saving little children from fiery deaths aren't "silly".Worst campaignEasy. Rudy Giuliani's (pictured left), specifically his decision to skip the first four GOP primary contests. You know - the ones that mattered. Best Clinton moment Hillary's New Hampshire comeback. Not only the famous crying episode, but the moment when she "found my own voice". Worst Clinton moment Hillary's gaffe when she said she had come under sniper fire when arriving in the Bosnian city of Tuzla? Nah. Hillary saying she and McCain had commander-in-chief credentials while Obama had "a speech he made in 2002"? Getting warmer. But I choose Bill's comparison of Obama's South Carolina win to Jesse Jackson's wins in the state in the 1980s. Both Clintons did their part against John McCain, but the Big Dog's primary season comportment isn't completely forgiven or forgotten.Worst Obama momentIn a New Hampshire debate, saying snidely to Hillary: "You're likeable enough." Cringe-inducing. He'd better keep that arrogant streak bottled up for four years.Worst press conference The controversial preacher Jeremiah Wright's preening appearance at the National Press Club, April 28 2008. The lowlight: the head of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, "is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century". Thanks a lot, Jer.Best "Man, thank God that guy didn't win the primary" momentAugust 8, when John Edwards finally acknowledged his extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter - conducted while his wife had cancer. His career is over. Silver lining: not everyone has a 29,000 sq ft house (2,700 m2) to go home to.Worst McCain lieAmid stiff competition, the nod goes to the television spot in which he accused Obama of cancelling a visit to American troops in Germany because he couldn't take cameras in to capture the moment. Completely false, as he almost had to know at the time, and a particularly toxic allegation.Best Sarah Palin moment Her convention speech. Like her or not, it was a rip-snorter. Remember when Democrats were nervous that she might actually be an asset to the Republican ticket?Worst Sarah Palin moment Well ... golly, let's see. The shopping spree? Not quite, because the damage had largely already been done by then. Clearly, the winner here is the interview with Katie Couric. It killed her. And as for the worst Palin micro-moment within the worst Palin moment, I'd have to go with the fact that she couldn't name a single supreme court decision in the entire history of the country besides the abortion decision Roe v Wade. This was of course before we learned that she didn't know what countries constitute North America.Best classic Joe Biden moment His remark in late October that Obama would be "tested" in his first six months in office by hostile world leaders was clearly his most off-message remark of the campaign. But Biden showed pretty good discipline - for Biden - through most of the campaign. And he probably did help in Pennsylvania, where Obama rolled.Best debate momentObama's wins in the debates weren't so much about moments as they were steadiness and consistency. But forced to choose one parry I'll take this one, from the first debate: "John, you like to pretend the war started in 2007 ... The war started in 2003. And at the time, when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy."Worst debate momentEasy. Second debate. McCain. "That one!" Nuff said. Worst strategic decision McCain's suspension of his campaign after the financial crisis hit. It was a bid to look serious, but it looked gimmicky. Obama's more sure-footed response to the meltdown is probably what won him the election more than any other single factor.Best John McCain momentHis speech at the Al Smith Dinner in New York, October 17, where he was both funnier and more gracious than Obama was in his remarks. "Whatever the outcome next month," McCain said, "Senator Obama has achieved a great thing for himself and for his country and I congratulate him." Where was this guy the rest of the time?Worst Joe the Plumber moment His attempt in an interview to defend his belief that Obama's election would mean the death of Israel. The television anchor was aghast and said: "Man. Some things - it just gets frightening sometimes." And this was on Fox News, folks!Best moment for America and the worldElection night. Best upcoming airplane ride to look forward to Next January 20, when George W Bush takes his last trip on Air Force One, back to Texas.US elections 2008Barack ObamaJohn McCainSarah PalinJoe BidenUnited Statesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Oliver Burkeman's Campaign Diary: The top 25 moments of the election campaign, part one

In an election campaign this long, and this filled with memorable moments, strange things begin to happen to memory and one's sense of time: it feels like years ago now that Barack Obama, somewhat stunned, approached the podium to celebrate victory in the Iowa caucuses, and more than three weeks since Joe the Plumber ambled into our lives. Who even remembers the antics of the Republican primary debates, or the furore over Hillary Clinton's gas tax holiday proposal? To jog your memory, and to kill some time while we wait for America to vote, here are 25 key moments from the race for the White House. This post contains the first dozen, in chronological order, starting with Obama announcing his candidacy for president in February last year. Part two follows shortly...(Note: these are real-life speeches and spontaneous moments, not ads or made-for-Youtube videos, so you won't find Obama Girl, or Paris Hilton, or Obama's infomercial, etcetera. I made a post more along those lines here.)1. February 10, 2007"I know it's a little chilly, but I'm fired up"Barack Obama announces his candidacy on an icy day in Springfield, Illinois2. April 18, 2007"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran"At a town hall meeting in South Carolina, John McCain makes a joke he would later come to regret3. April 26, 2007Joe Biden on Joe Biden's gaffe problemAt a Democratic primary debate in Orangeburg, South Carolina, the future vice-presidential candidate -- at this point a presidential contender, of course -- delivers a one-word answer to a question about his tendency to ramble4. May 3, 2007"Is there anyone on the stage who does not believe in evolution?"In the first Republican primary debate, at the Reagan Library in California, Senator Sam Brownback, former Governor Mike Huckabee and congressman Tom Tancredo all, rather nervously, raise their hands5. September 21, 2007Rudy Giuliani takes a phone callThe candidate was speaking to the National Rifle Association when his phone rang, but some doubted the spontaneity of this moment of spousal affection6. October 30, 2007"A noun, a verb, and 9/11"Speaking at a debate in Philadelphia, Joe Biden notices a certain recurring tic in the speeches of Rudy Giuliani7. October 30, 2007Drivers' licensesAt the same debate, Hillary Clinton -- under questioning from Tim Russert, whose subsequent death shocked Washington -- gets tangled up on New York governor Eliot Spitzer's policies towards illegal immigrants. Spitzer soon had other things to worry about8. January 3 2008"They said this day would never come. They said our sights were set too high"Obama, sometimes seeming almost as surprised as the audience, delivers a victory speech after the Iowa caucuses9. January 5, 2007"You're likeable enough"In a rare blunder, Obama, debating in New Hampshire, makes himself look mean-spirited, and hands an advantage to Hillary Clinton10. January 7 2008Hillary's tearsA tearful moment at a campaign stop proved crucial in humanising Clinton, and prolonging her bid for the nomination11. February 12, 2008"I felt this thrill going up my leg"The MSNBC host Chris Matthews makes his most memorable, and mockable, remark of the campaign12. March 18, 2008A more perfect unionIn Philadelphia, Obama responds to the Jeremiah Wright affair with a profoundly moving speech on race and the American democratic experimentContinued...US elections 2008Barack ObamaJohn McCainJoe BidenSarah PalinRudy GiulianiMike Huckabeeguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Boehlert: Nothing funny about Star Tribune's treatment of Franken

The Minneapolis Star Tribune closed the barn door a little last week. On Thursday, the newspaper's editor Nancy Barnes distributed a newsroom memo announcing that the paper's columnists should refrain from political commentary until November 5. She thought it was best if the paper's cadre of opinion makers "refrain[ed] from partisan political commentary in their columns ... at least until after the election." And that columnists would "'stand down' on the kind of column that's an overtly partisan take." I always thought columnists were paid to express their opinions and to share with readers unvarnished insights on the issues of the day, electoral politics being just about at the top of that list. But if that's how the editor of the Strib (as it is known locally) wanted to handle the home stretch, to go ultra-civil, than that's certainly her right. What raised eyebrows in the land of Minnesota Nice was that Barnes' memo landed on desks (or in inboxes) the day after newspaper columnist Katherine Kersten uncorked a sidewinder that tagged Al Franken, running for the U.S. Senate in the state, as being anti-Christian, and specifically anti-Catholic. Cherry-picking from his three-decade career as a comedy writer and satirist, Kersten highlighted a handful of cracks and claimed he was unfit for the Senate because he was a "slanderer of Christianity." ("Vulgar mockery of Christians: Is this what we want in a U.S. senator?" read the headline.) For instance, Kersten was deeply offended by a skit idea for Saturday Night Live, which never aired, in which Franken suggested a series of dogs, played by cast members, confessing to a priest. (I'm Catholic, and just the premise of that skit made me laugh.) In another book, Franken described greeting a New York audience with the words, "Isn't Cardinal O'Connor an asshole?" (Trust me, in New York in the 1990s, that was not as provocative a statement as it seems today; O'Connor was an extraordinarily political and, at times, divisive figure.) Then, in a deceptive bit of wordcraft, Kersten wrote, "In today's surreal political climate, a guy who lobs insults like these has a shot at one the highest political offices in the land." Note the verb tense: "lobs," as in the present tense. As in, Franken's still in the comedy business and looking for punch lines at the expense of Christians, and especially Catholics. (Franken's daughter quickly reminded readers in a Star Tribune online forum that her father had been married to a Catholic for 33 years.) In a state where just 0.9 percent of the population is Jewish (like Franken), the implications of Kersten's column -- that Christian slanderer Franken might not be able to represent Minnesota's citizens -- was likely not lost on many readers. It was a loaded and wildly unfair accusation to make. And yet, it was only after that vicious attack had been unfurled in the Star Tribune -- and unfurled during the closing weeks of an extremely tight senatorial race -- that the newspaper's editor decided it was time to muzzle any further campaign commentary from the paper's columnists. Adding to the irony (or the double standard; take your pick) was the fact that Please, people, no partisanship memo was distributed the very same day the Star Tribune printed a front-page article about GOP operative Jeff Larson, who found himself at the center of the Sarah Palin shopping spree scandal. (It was Larson's credit card that got burned up by Neiman Marcus to the tune of $75,000, courtesy of the Palin camp.) Larson just happens to be one of the closest and most-connected Minnesota political allies of Franken's Republican opponent, Sen. Norm Coleman. But rather than present the story as an embarrassment to Coleman, the Strib's article about Larson was a valentine, complete with "Clark Kent" in the headline. As the local blog MNpublius noted: It is an unbelievable puff piece. Here's some excerpts: "smart Clark Kent," "Superman," "low-profile guru," "entrepreneur," "just the guy who arranges the phone calls," "rising star," "visionary," "nothing mysterious about him," "practices his Beltway-centered trade far outside the Beltway," "disciple of Ronald Reagan," "shoots straight," "honest," and "keeps his nose clean." The story included only friendly quotes from Republicans, even though the operative has been tied to sleazy campaign practices in the past, including misleading robo-calls. From the Strib: He denies any involvement with the nationwide spate of "robo-calls" trashing Obama, although he acknowledges that FLS Connect is behind the live-operator calls Minnesota residents have received in the past week on behalf of Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Larson denied any involvement in the robo-calls despite the fact he owns the company that been placing the robo-calls? The role of the dailies Even with their dwindling circulation, big-city newspapers can still exert tremendous influence during local election season, especially in a state like Minnesota that has just a handful of major newspapers. But are they being fair? Blogger Matt Stoller recently made a compelling case that The Seattle Times had its thumb on the scale while covering the very close race between netroots candidate Darcy Burner and an established Republican Dave Reichert. The same may be happening in Minnesota. Like lots of major dailies, the Strib has been buffeted in recent years by staff cutbacks and accusations of a liberal bias. It seems that the effects of both are on display in the Franken/Coleman campaign. Newsroom cutbacks make it more difficult to provide smart, in-depth election coverage. Perhaps more telling at the Strib, though, has been the long-running war conservatives have waged against the paper, led by bloggers such as Ed Morrissey, Hugh Hewitt, and those at Power Line. Their relentless cries of liberal media bias appear to have paid off. As one Strib veteran put it last year: The right-wing blog voices that were bashing the paper a couple of years ago, Hugh Hewitt and the rest, have gotten pretty much everything they wanted. They wanted to get rid of people like [editorial board members] Jim Boyd and Susan Albright and their editorial policy, and they've succeeded at that. Now there won't be editorials about the war and global warming; they'll write about local issues like zoning conflicts in Coon Rapids instead. They wanted the paper to hire a conservative columnist, and they got that. From here on out, it looks like the Strib becomes the conservative, suburbs-oriented paper. Indeed, "The [editorial] page has shucked its rep as a lefty lightning rod," wrote David Brauer, a Strib-watcher at MinnPost.com. A recent Star Tribune editorial opposing the pro-labor Employee Free Choice Act signaled the sea change at the newspaper. So did the paper's support for offshore drilling. That raised even more eyebrows because the Strib's parent, Avista Capital Partners, is heavily invested in offshore drilling, although the cheerleading drill-baby-drill editorial did not disclose that fact. Also note that the newspaper's editorial page has not condemned the remarks of local Republican Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, who recently went on MSNBC and claimed she was concerned about Barack Obama's "anti-American views." The comments erupted into a campaign-changing controversy, with Bachmann's challenger banking nearly $1 million in donations that flooded into his coffers after Bachmann's outburst. The Strib's editorial page, though, has remained mum. In fact, it has moved so far to the right that the debate online among Minnesota pol-watchers was whether the paper would endorse Coleman or independent candidate Dean Barkley. Franken, the conventional wisdom went, had little chance of landing the Trib nod. (And they were right; Coleman won the newspaper's endorsement.) Unfortunately, that tilt seems to be spilling over into the Star Tribune's news coverage. There was the way the newspaper buried Hillary Clinton's recent visit on behalf of Franken on page B4 even though her rally appearance garnered huge local television coverage. The way it included a disparaging quote from Coleman's spokesperson in its article about Clinton's visit, yet when Rudy Giuliani recently came to town to rally support for Coleman, the Franken campaign was not quoted in that article. And there was the way the daily recently published an anti-Franken letter to the editor that claimed he was not "good for the country" or good for Christians, and the letter writer lived in Tennessee. (Talk about casting a wide net from Minneapolis.) The paper has also looked away from Coleman's woes. Over the summer, when it became known Coleman was renting an apartment in Washington, D.C. from Jeff Larson (the same guy from the Palin shopping spree story) and that Coleman's rent appeared to be well below market value, the Strib ran a front-page story about the apartment but never mentioned Larson's name or addressed the question of whether the rent represented a sweetheart deal. (Readers had to go to page B7 for a separate article that day to read those salient details.) At the time, there were also questions about whether Coleman had paid his utility bills for the apartment or whether they had been comped by Larson. A Coleman campaign spokesman told reporters in August he would try to produce one of the bills to curious reporters who wanted to know if the bills were in the name of Larson or even his company. But three months later, no utility bill has been produced, and the Strib appears to have stopped asking. Meanwhile, the paper pretty much ignored Coleman's embarrassing Suitgate when it popped up earlier this month. The story erupted when Harper's Ken Silverstein claimed that wealthy Coleman donor Nasser Kazeminy had, over the years, bought expensive suits for the politician at Neiman Marcus. (Again with the Neiman Marcus?) The campaign refused to respond to the report, and the story peaked when Coleman's spokesman appeared at a press conference and 12 times in three minutes refused to answer directly whether Kazeminy had ever purchased expensive suits for Coleman. The Washington Post quickly named the cringe-inducing back-and-forth with reporters "perhaps, the most awkward press conference in the history of politics." Did the story border on the trivial? Sure. Was it the kind of story that can change a campaign? Absolutely. Polls since Suitgate broke have shown momentum moving in Franken's direction. In fact, it quickly became a national story online and on cable TV, and one of the Strib's reporters was invited onto MSNBC to discuss the details and the campaign implications. The irony was the reporter had only mentioned the kerfuffle in two paragraphs at the very bottom on a campaign update. The Strib didn't really care about Suitgate. To this day, those two paragraphs, 53 words in total, represents the Star Tribune's entire print news team coverage of that story -- an embarrassing tale that could cost Coleman his Senate seat.

CNN reports leave out relevant facts on ACORN voter registration allegations

From October 6 through October 15, CNN ran at least 54 segments mentioning allegations that the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now [ACORN] submitted allegedly false or duplicate voter registration applications this year in a number of states, according to a Media Matters for America search* of the Nexis database. But only one of those segments mentioned both of the following two relevant points: 1) that the statutes of most of those states require third parties registering prospective voters to submit all registration forms they receive; and 2) that actual instances of illegal votes being cast as a result of registration fraud are extremely rare. Indeed, in an October 10 press release, ACORN noted that "in almost every state we are required to turn in ALL completed applications, even the ones we know to be problematic." And in a 2007 report titled "The Truth About Voter Fraud," New York University's Brennan Center for Justice stated, "[W]e are aware of no recent substantiated case in which registration fraud has resulted in fraudulent votes being cast." Of the 54 CNN segments addressing the allegations against ACORN, two mentioned only the former of those two points, while one mentioned just the latter. While the media have devoted great attention to charges of voter fraud, in past election cycles such charges have largely proven baseless. According to the Brennan Center: There have been several documented and widely publicized instances in which registration forms have been fraudulently completed and submitted. But it is extraordinarily difficult to find reported cases in which individuals have submitted registration forms in someone else's name in order to impersonate them at the polls. Furthermore, most reports of registration fraud do not actually claim that the fraud happens so that ineligible people can vote at the polls. Indeed, we are aware of no recent substantiated case in which registration fraud has resulted in fraudulent votes being cast. Additionally, an October 16 ABCNews.com article reported that Sen. John McCain's "voter fraud worries -- about ACORN or anyone else -- are unsupported by the facts, said experts on election fraud, who recall similar concerns being raised in several previous elections, despite a near-total absence of cases." The article quoted David Becker, "a lawyer for the Bush administration until 2005, in the Justice Department's voting rights section, which was part of the administration's aggressive anti-vote-fraud effort," who stated, "There's no evidence that any of these invalid registrations lead to any invalid votes" and added: "The Justice Department really made prosecution of voter fraud of this sort a big priority in the first half of this decade, and they really didn't come up with anything." Indeed, the U.S. Department of Justice crime statistics cast doubt on the existence of widespread voter fraud. According to a report by the Justice Department's Criminal Division of prosecutions between October 2002 and September 2005, the Justice Department charged 95 people with "election fraud" and convicted 55. Among those, however, just 17 individuals were convicted for casting fraudulent ballots; cases against three other individuals were pending at the time of the report. Further, on April 12, 2007, The New York Times reported, "Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews." During a report on the October 12 edition of CNN Sunday Morning -- the only CNN report to mention both of the above points -- anchor Betty Nguyen aired a clip from ACORN chief organizer Bertha Lewis's October 10 interview on CNN's Larry King Live, in which Lewis said: "First of all, in every county when you register voters, you've got to turn in every single card no matter how weird or wacko it may appear, that's the law." Later in the segment, Nguyen asked Demos.org's Steve Carbo, "I mean, are these numbers inflated here or is ACORN truly involved in voter fraud?" Carbo replied, "I think we need to be clear about what voter fraud is. The record shows that it's exceedingly rare for individuals to show up on the polls on Election Day and pretend to be other people, to vote twice, to vote illegally." Three segments mentioned one, but not both points. Two segments mentioned that many states require ACORN to submit all registration forms it received. On the October 10 edition of Larry King Live, Lewis said, "First of all, in every county when you register voters, you've got to turn in every single card no matter how weird or wacko it may appear, that's the law." In a later segment on the same broadcast, after radio host Stephanie Miller called the allegations against ACORN "a non-story," King asked her, "Because you have to bring whatever they fill out?" Miller replied, "Yes." One additional segment suggested that voter fraud is extremely rare. During a roundtable on the October 11 edition of CNN Newsroom, civil rights attorney Avery Friedman said, "Now in reality, when either Mr. or Ms. Turkey show up at the voting booth, today there is a built-in protective mechanism. So, although it sounds like a big deal, and I think some of the partisans are trying to paint it that, for those people who get minimum wage, who have quotas, those people are in trouble for doing these kinds of things. But the bottom line is that the system will work. I don't think Jive Turkey will be voting this November." The following 50 CNN segments did not include either of the above relevant facts (all program times ET): Date Show Anchors/Correspondents/Guests 10/15 Lou Dobbs Tonight Host Lou Dobbs, correspondent Bill Tucker 10/15 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs, correspondent Drew Griffin, Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf 10/15 CNN Newsroom 1 PM Anchor Kyra Phillips, Griffin 10/15 CNN Newsroom 11 AM Anchor Tony Harris, Griffin 10/15 CNN Newsroom 10 AM Anchor Heidi Collins, correspondent Brian Todd 10/15 CNN Newsroom 9 AM Collins, Griffin 10/15 American Morning 7 AM Anchor Kiran Chetry, Griffin 10/15 American Morning 6 AM Chetry 10/14 Anderson Cooper 360 Host Anderson Cooper, political analysts David Gergen, Roland Martin, Alex Castellanos 10/14 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs, Tucker 10/14 Situation Room 6 PM Host Wolf Blitzer, Todd 10/14 Situation Room 6 PM Blitzer, Griffin 10/14 Situation Room 4 PM Blitzer, correspondent Jessica Yellin 10/14 CNN Newsroom 3 PM Anchor Rick Sanchez, presidential candidate Ralph Nader (I) 10/14 CNN Newsroom 3 PM Sanchez, correspondent Joshua Levs 10/14 CNN Newsroom 2 PM Phillips, WEWS reporter Duane Pohlman 10/14 CNN Newsroom 1 PM Phillips, Levs 10/14 CNN Newsroom Noon Harris, Pohlman 10/14 CNN Newsroom 11 AM Harris, Griffin, Blitzer 10/14 CNN Newsroom 11 AM Harris, Tucker, Levs 10/14 CNN Newsroom 10 AM Collins, Pohlman 10/14 CNN Newsroom 9 AM Collins, Tucker 10/14 American Morning 7 AM Chetry, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) 10/13 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs, Tucker 10/13 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs 10/13 Situation Room 5 PM Blitzer, Griffin 10/13 CNN Newsroom 1 PM Phillips, Griffin 10/12 The Next President: Battlegrounds Host John King, Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner 10/12 Lou Dobbs This Week Dobbs, Griffin 10/12 Lou Dobbs This Week Dobbs, Tucker 10/12 Lou Dobbs This Week Dobbs, New York Daily News columnist Errol Louis, Sheinkopf 10/12 CNN Sunday Morning 9 AM Anchor Betty Nguyen, Griffin 10/11 The Next President: Battlegrounds King, Brunner 10/11 Lou Dobbs This Week Dobbs, Griffin 10/11 Lou Dobbs This Week Dobbs, Tucker 10/11 Lou Dobbs This Week Dobbs, Louis, Sheinkopf 10/10 Larry King Live Host Larry King, Griffin 10/10 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs, Tucker 10/10 CNN Newsroom 1 PM Phillips, Griffin 10/10 CNN Newsroom Noon Harris, Griffin 10/10 CNN Newsroom 9 AM Nguyen, Griffin 10/10 American Morning 8 AM Anchor John Roberts, Griffin 10/9 Anderson Cooper 360 Cooper, Griffin 10/9 Larry King Live King, Democratic strategist Tanya Acker, Republican strategist Andrea Tantaros, Democratic strategist Paul Begala 10/9 CNN Election Center Host Campbell Brown, Griffin 10/9 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs, Griffin 10/9 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs, Tucker 10/9 Situation Room 5 PM Roberts, Griffin 10/9 CNN Newsroom 3 PM Sanchez, Griffin 10/7 Lou Dobbs Tonight Dobbs * Media Matters searched the Nexis database for CNN for "acorn" from October 6 through October 15

ABC's Robin Roberts did not challenge Giuliani's tax falsehood

On the October 14 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, co-host Robin Roberts did not challenge former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani when he claimed Sen. Barack Obama "wants to raise taxes," repeating a conservative charge that often goes unchallenged by the media. In fact, Obama has repeatedly said he would cut taxes for low- and middle-income families, specifically those making less than $250,000 per year. Further, Sen. John McCain's own chief economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, reportedly said that it is inaccurate to claim that "Barack Obama raises taxes." Obama again laid out his plan to cut taxes during an October 10 campaign stop in Ohio. He said: You've heard a lot about taxes in this campaign. Well, here's the truth -- my opponent and I are both offering tax cuts. The difference is, he wants to give $200 billion in tax cuts to the biggest corporations in America, and he wants to give the average Fortune 500 CEO a $700,000 tax cut. But he gives nothing at all to over 100 million Americans. I have a different set of priorities. I'll give a middle-class tax cut to 95% of all workers. And if you make less than $250,000 a year -- which includes 98 percent of small business owners -- you won't see your taxes increase one single dime. Not your payroll taxes, not your income taxes, not your capital gains taxes -- nothing. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class. A September 15 analysis of the candidates' tax plans by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center -- written prior to McCain's October 14 announcement of a $52.5 billion economic plan -- found that "Obama would give larger tax cuts to low- and moderate-income households and pay some of the cost by raising taxes on high-income taxpayers. In contrast, McCain would cut taxes across the board and give the biggest cuts to the highest-income households." The report says that through Obama's plan, "By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase -- a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income." Further, "McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent." From the October 14 broadcast of ABC's Good Morning America: GIULIANI: I mean, look, both campaigns have had people -- surrogates, people who are involved with them, say things that maybe the candidates themselves wouldn't say. The reality is they have great disagreements -- a lot of respect for each other -- but great disagreements. I think the real issue here is, in my view, John McCain is much more prepared to be president than Barack Obama. He has the experience. He's led -- he's led this country through crisis before. Barack Obama is basically new on the scene. He doesn't have that experience. Those are not personal things, those are things that go to their resume, and I think that's what John will be emphasizing. Plus, I think his package of reforms for the economy are really going to help this economy grow, whereas I think Barack Obama, who wants to raise taxes, raise tariffs -- which is exactly what Herbert Hoover did -- would be a terrible mistake. ROBERTS: And how does John McCain turn it around? Our ABC News/Washington Post poll has him 10 points down. No one has ever come back from that kind of deficit.

Matthews does not believe McCain would personally join in his campaign's attacks -- but he did

MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews falsely suggested that Sen. John McCain is unwilling to personally engage in the false accusation made by his campaign that Sen. Barack Obama was comparing Gov. Sarah Palin to a pig when Obama said, regarding McCain's policies, "[Y]ou can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig." Matthews said on the September 11 special edition of MSNBC's 9-11: As It Happened, that when Time's Rick Stengel and PBS' Judy Woodruff had the chance to interview McCain during a civil service forum that day, "it'd have been good if they had said to him, John McCain, when they had him in the hot seat there: Are you saying that your opponent has called your running mate a pig? Just right to his face. Because his ads say it, his people say it, his money says it. Force him to say it, because John McCain would not say it. He would never say Barack Obama called Governor Palin a pig." However, in a September 10 interview with Telemundo, when reportedly asked what he dislikes about campaigning, McCain said: "Probably the negativism, those negative ads and personal attacks, Senator Obama's recent comments about 'lipstick on a pig.' " Like MSNBC, Telemundo is owned by NBC Universal. McCain's reference in the Telemundo interview to Obama's "lipstick" comment aired on the September 10 edition of MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann and the September 10 edition of NBC's Nightly News. On the September 10 edition of Hardball, before McCain's Telemundo interview aired, Matthews also said that McCain would not "say his opponent called his running mate a pig." During that program, Matthews stated: "I do have a tremendous amount of faith in John McCain's integrity. He used to be on this show all the time. In fact, we did a big thing with him a couple months ago up at Villanova. I don't believe he would sit where you are sitting and call his opponent -- or say his opponent called his running mate a pig. I don't believe he would say that." On September 11, after the Telemundo interview aired on NBC and MSNBC, Matthews again asserted that McCain "would never say Barack Obama called Governor Palin a pig," and added: Yet, all the time, the last two or three days have been focused on that very charge from that campaign, with his name and his money on the ad, but make him say it. By the way, we should always do that. When there's some slime being thrown over the fence, we should go over to the other side of the fence, grab the candidate, and say, "Did you throw that slime? You, personally?" And that's why I like these face-to-face, they missed the chance to catch him on that. From the September 11 edition of MSNBC's 9-11: As It Happened: MATTHEWS: Well, it's not any worse, but Rudy Giuliani was far worse than she was. I mean, Rudy Giuliani ridiculed this [Obama's work as a community organizer] from day one in his keynote speech. Clearly, it's a way to connotate, to connect him with inner city, South Chicago neighborhoods. It's to make him somewhat remote from the voters they're trying to reach. It's clear politics, and it's like the lipstick thing. I mean, it's clearly the kind of thing that wouldn't happen if they're sitting next to each other. You don't shoot spitballs at the person a foot from you. You don't hang an effigy of the guy having dinner with you. Clearly, when they're close to each other, people like McCain stop doing that stuff. RACHEL MADDOW (MSNBC host): Do you think the community organizer -- MATTHEWS: When they're in the same room with them -- MADDOW: Do you think that attack, that community organizer reference then is sort of an oblique race reference? Or is it just a difference reference? MATTHEWS: Well, it's more complicated than that, but let's think -- we think Al Sharpton. MADDOW: Hmm. Well, then -- MATTHEWS: We think the kind of person that would not be appealing to the voter they're after -- let's put it that way. Let's make it completely referential and relative rather than calling it clearly what we don't know. But the way -- the use of the lipstick thing was brilliant, because no one really thought that Barack Obama was taking a direct shot. In fact, I wish that -- I like Richard Stengel and Judy Woodruff, they're great correspondents and journalists -- but I thought it'd have been good if they had said to him, John McCain, when they had him in the hot seat there: Are you saying that your opponent has called your running mate a pig? Just right to his face. Because his ads say it, his people say it, his money says it. Force him to say it, because John McCain would not say it. He would never say Barack Obama called Governor Palin a pig. Yet, all the time, the last two or three days have been focused on that very charge from that campaign, with his name and his money on the ad, but make him say it. By the way, we should always do that. When there's some slime being thrown over the fence, we should go over to the other side of the fence, grab the candidate, and say, "Did you throw that slime? You, personally?" And that's why I like these face-to-face, they missed the chance to catch him on that. From the September 10 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews: MATTHEWS: I made my point, which I think is, the Republicans use this phrase relentlessly. All their leaders use it. John McCain uses it. His former press secretary wrote a book entitled Lipstick on a Pig, explaining how to use it to cut through spin. John, you're allowed to say uncle on this show. JENNY BACKUS (Democratic strategist): Well -- MATTHEWS: You're allowed to come on and say, "My party, in this case, is full of bunk." You're allowed to do that. I give you time to think about that. Your thoughts, Jenny? BACKUS: Well, I mean, I think the other important thing, and we would -- John was trying to say there, I mean, people need to be very careful about charges of sexism, because, you know, if Sarah Palin and John McCain are so concerned about sexism, how come they don't support equal pay for equal work? Where's the outrage on that? MATTHEWS: Are you talking substance? BACKUS: I actually am. MATTHEWS: Are you talking substance? BACKUS: Stop the -- MATTHEWS: My God. BACKUS: It is crazy -- JOHN FEEHERY (Republican strategist): I would like to. I'd like to talk about substance. BACKUS: -- but that is. I mean, and to go back again, I mean, there is a really disturbing thing happening for people who actually, like me -- there's a lot of Democrats, for a long time, that thought Joe Biden -- everybody thought that John McCain was a pretty decent guy. But what you're seeing now here is the beginning of hypocrisy, and I think that's a big problem. It's how they brought down John Kerry. They tried to make him look hypocritical. Here, you've got two candidates who say they want to change the tone, and, really -- FEEHERY: Listen, listen -- BACKUS: -- the only makeup worth talking about is -- FEEHERY: -- Jenny, let me say this. Let me say this, that throughout this -- ever since Sarah Palin became the nominee, there's been a sustained attack on everything she's said and done, most of which are complete and total lies from the other campaign. So -- BACKUS: Well, I do want to talk about -- all right, let's talk about it. How about -- how about taxpayer per diem -- taking a per diem from the taxpayer to stay at home? MATTHEWS: OK. BACKUS: How about taxpayers paying for travel? How about "Bridge to Nowhere"? I think that's stuff that they made up. [crosstalk] FEEHERY: The "Bridge to Nowhere," she was -- she killed the "Bridge to Nowhere," and that's been widely acknowledged that she killed the bridge to nowhere. BACKUS: OK, she was for the bridge before she was against it. MATTHEWS: The idea that she was -- she was initially for it. FEEHERY: Well, of course. I mean, she's the governor. MATTHEWS: OK. She was initially for it. BACKUS: Of course. FEEHERY: And then she saw -- and then she saw the -- MATTHEWS: Of course she was. FEEHERY: She saw that there was a coast -- a cost overrun. MATTHEWS: We're not going to show that montage, whatever, collage, whatever you call it, over and over again of her saying she opposed it. Look, I'm not getting into this fight. I do have a tremendous amount of faith in John McCain's integrity. He used to be on this show all the time. In fact, he's -- we did a big thing with him a couple months ago up at Villanova. I don't believe he would sit where you're sitting and call his opponent -- or say his opponent called his running mate a pig. I don't believe he'd say that. FEEHEREY: I agree with you. BACKUS: But -- but he is. MATTHEWS: So, I wonder why his people agree doing that. Let's, if we can -- BACKUS: But, look, if John -- hold on. MATTHEWS: -- let's show the ad one more time -- BACKUS: OK. MATTHEWS: -- so that we all know what we're talking about. This is what the focus is. It's not what John McCain says, 'cause he hasn't said anything. It's what he's allowed his campaign to put out, which I think is a distraction. I think you agree with me. We shouldn't be talking about this. Just to deal with this, let's take a look right now at the campaign Web video, paid for and put out by the McCain campaign, so we're reminding ourselves what we're really dealing with here, which is a claim I don't think the candidate himself would make. Let's watch.