Couric: Nationalizing Banks Will Provide 'Big Dose of Confidence' --2/20/2009

1. Couric: Nationalizing Banks Will Provide 'Big Dose of Confidence'
Katie Couric concluded a Thursday night look at the pros and cons of nationalizing banks by seeing the federal government as a comforting security blanket: "Nationalization may have a psychological impact as well, and Uncle Sam wrapping his arms around failing banks in this country might provide a big dose of confidence for the American consumer." Building to her pro-nationalization conclusion, Couric asserted that "everyone hopes to avoid what happened to Japan back in the 90s when the government pumped good money into bad banks, essentially keeping unhealthy financial institutions that weren't going to make it anyway on life support, crippling the economy" while, in contrast, "a government takeover of a bank last year" in Britain " helped to temporarily calm fears in the financial markets there."

2. CBS Criticizes GOP Governors for Opposing Stimulus
On Thursday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith opened the show by declaring: "As President Obama heads on his first foreign trip, some state governors are saying 'thanks, but no thanks' to the stimulus money, even in these desperate times. We'll ask one of them why." Later, co-host Maggie Rodriguez interviewed Republican South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and asked: "Even if it takes a while to get the money, how do you justify, let's say, not taking it to your constituents when in your state, for example, in December had the third highest unemployment rate in the country. Don't you need the money?" After Sanford explained that he was opposed to the bill but may accept some of the funding, Rodriguez responded: "You say you're against it, but you still might take the money. Do you realize how some people might think that you're putting ideology ahead of the interests of your constituents?" He began to reply: "Well, I'd say it's the reverse. If we take the money -- in other words, I've said -- I've made my ideological stand, saying this is a bad idea-" Rodriguez interrupted: "But if you're so against it, why take the money?"

3. ABC Frets NY Post Comic Could Harm 'Post-Racial Glow' of Obama
Good Morning America reporter David Wright on Thursday worried that a comic strip appearing in Wednesday's New York Post could harm the "post racial glow" that America has been enjoying since Barack Obama's inauguration. Wright recounted the outrage expressed by the Reverend Al Sharpton and others over an editorial cartoon depicting a chimp shot by police and connecting it to the just passed economic stimulus bill. Wright derided: "Ever since the inauguration, America has seemed to bask in a post-racial glow. But not so fast. Yesterday, the New York Post published a cartoon likening President Obama to a violent monkey shot by police." The GMA journalist chose to accept the most sinister view of the comic, that the dead ape was intended to represent the President.

4. CNN Talking Heads Unanimously Praise Holder's 'Coward' Remarks
Anchor Campbell Brown's show on CNN is subtitled "No Bias, No Bull," but the show displayed plenty of bias in a Wednesday night segment on Attorney General Eric Holder calling America "a nation of cowards" on race issues. Brown praised Holder for "cutting through the bull," and a panel discussion was utterly unanimous: Gloria Borger, Soledad O'Brien, and Roland Martin all toed the liberal line and praised Holder for lambasting the nation. Martin wholeheartedly agreed with Holder's characterization. Borger defended the first black attorney general, stating that he was "trying to be provocative on purpose," while O'Brien thought the Obama appointee was trying to start a "honest conversation" on race.

5. Muslim Wife's Beheading Spiked, But Not Charge Against Catholic
The founder of a TV network devoted to improve the image of Muslims being charged in the beheading of his wife is not a story the major media have leaped on. On Friday, news broke that Muzzammil Hassan, founder and CEO of Bridges TV, was charged with murdering his wife Aasiya after she filed for divorce. After some Nexis research, here's a listing of major media outlets that have yet to report it: ABC, NBC, NPR, the NewsHour on PBS, USA Today, and The Washington Post. But on November 12, 1993, all these networks (including NPR) reported within hours on the charges made against Chicago's Catholic cardinal at the time, liberal-leaning Joseph Bernardin, by a 34-year-old AIDS patient, who had just "remembered" he was sexually abused 18 years after the alleged event, and wanted $10 million for his anguish.

6. Sign Up to Receive the MRC's Notable Quotables Via E-Mail
Another edition of the MRC's new Notable Quotables e-mail will be distributed on Monday. Amongst the category headings: "Applauding Professor Obama's 'Teaching Moment,'" "ABC's Moran: Too Nice Obama 'Got No Honeymoon,'" "Scolding Anti-Spending GOP: 'Where's the Bipartisanship?'" and "Katie Celebrates 'Stimulus' Deal by Giggling with Pelosi." The new e-mail service is available in two formats: You can receive it as plain text, or in HTML which will feature graphics, images and click-and-play links to video clips. The newest edition will highlight several videos. To subscribe to either format: http://www.mrc.org/subscriptions/

Couric: Nationalizing Banks Will Provide
'Big Dose of Confidence'

Katie Couric concluded a Thursday night look at the pros and cons of nationalizing banks by seeing the federal government as a comforting security blanket: "Nationalization may have a psychological impact as well, and Uncle Sam wrapping his arms around failing banks in this country might provide a big dose of confidence for the American consumer." Building to her pro-nationalization conclusion, Couric asserted that "everyone hopes to avoid what happened to Japan back in the 90s when the government pumped good money into bad banks, essentially keeping unhealthy financial institutions that weren't going to make it anyway on life support, crippling the economy" while, in contrast, "a government takeover of a bank last year" in Britain " helped to temporarily calm fears in the financial markets there."

Earlier in the CBS Evening News piece, Couric outlined the arguments for and against nationalization, ending with quite an understatement about the quality of government-provided customer service: "There are two sides to this coin. It could keep banks open and free up money so they can start lending again. But it could scare off private investors who will see government ownership as a sign of damaged goods, there could be more branch closings, and a government bureaucracy may not offer the best customer service."

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Thursday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

The complete story as aired on the Thursday, February 19 CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: Today's decline on Wall Street was led by financial stocks. Investors are worried that the U.S. government may nationalize American banks. Why do that? And what impact might it have? Tonight we go beyond the headlines to look nationalization and what it means. For a lot of people on Wall Street, bank nationalization is a scary proposition.
BERT ELY, BANK ANALYST: The fear factor is what would it cost the taxpayers and what would it mean?
COURIC: What does "bank nationalization" mean? The government would take control of failing banks, putting in money to help get them back into the black. There are more than 8,000 banks in the U.S. and not all of them would be nationalized. Just the biggest ones in the most trouble. There are two sides to this coin. It could keep banks open and free up money so they can start lending again. But it could scare off private investors who will see government ownership as a sign of damaged goods, there could be more branch closings, and a government bureaucracy may not offer the best customer service.
PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT: We face the future with confidence and with courage.
COURIC: During the Great Depression, instead of taking over distressed banks, President Roosevelt chose to prop them up with government funds until the economy recovered. That's what the U.S. has just done in the case of two of this country's biggest waning banks, CitiGroup, and Bank of America. Those bailout bucks saved them from the fate of financial giants Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. But the Fed Chairman has made it clear: If some banks are nationalized, it would be temporary.
BEN BERNANKE, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD, ON WEDNESDAY: I think there's a very strong commitment on the part of the administration to try to return banks, or keep banks private or return them to private hands as quickly as possible.
COURIC: Everyone hopes to avoid what happened to Japan back in the 90s when the government pumped good money into bad banks, essentially keeping unhealthy financial institutions that weren't going to make it anyway on life support, crippling the economy.
ELY: It was called the lost decade.
COURIC: But in Britain a government takeover of a bank last year helped to temporarily calm fears in the financial markets there. Nationalization may have a psychological impact as well, and Uncle Sam wrapping his arms around failing banks in this country might provide a big dose of confidence for the American consumer.

CBS Criticizes GOP Governors for Opposing
Stimulus

On Thursday's CBS Early Show, co-host Harry Smith opened the show by declaring: "As President Obama heads on his first foreign trip, some state governors are saying 'thanks, but no thanks' to the stimulus money, even in these desperate times. We'll ask one of them why." Later, co-host Maggie Rodriguez interviewed Republican South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and asked: "Even if it takes a while to get the money, how do you justify, let's say, not taking it to your constituents when in your state, for example, in December had the third highest unemployment rate in the country. Don't you need the money?" After Sanford explained that he was opposed to the bill but may accept some of the funding, Rodriguez responded: "You say you're against it, but you still might take the money. Do you realize how some people might think that you're putting ideology ahead of the interests of your constituents?" He began to reply: "Well, I'd say it's the reverse. If we take the money -- in other words, I've said -- I've made my ideological stand, saying this is a bad idea-" Rodriguez interrupted: "But if you're so against it, why take the money?"

[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

On Wednesday's CBS Evening News, correspondent Bill Whitaker reported on the importance of the stimulus bill for states: "California is by far the worst, but 46 states face serious budget shortfalls. All 28 Democratic governors, and four Republicans, welcome the stimulus money, including Charlie Crist of Florida...Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty says he doesn't like the package but with a $5 billion deficit, he'll take the money... Here in California, taking the federal money is the one thing the Republican Governor and almost every other politician can agree on."

Whitaker made only brief mention of Republican governors opposing the federal funding: "But for other GOP governors, it's problematic. While all have shovel-ready projects, some have philosophical objections. Alaska's Palin, Barbour of Mississippi, and Jindal of Louisiana say they might not take the money...Texan Rick Perry is mulling it over."

Here is the full transcript of the Early Show segment:

7:00AM TEASE:
HARRY SMITH: As President Obama heads on his first foreign trip, some state governors are saying 'thanks, but no thanks' to the stimulus money, even in these desperate times. We'll ask one of them why.

7:03AM SEGMENT:
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Let's talk more specifically, now, about the stimulus bill. Some Republican governors have questions and concerns about the measure. We're joined by one of them, Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina, head of the Republican Governors Association. Good morning, Governor.
MARK SANFORD: Good morning.
RODRIGUEZ: It's no secret that Republicans, many of them, most of them in Congress, don't support this, but a number of Republican governors do because it offers so much aid for the states. Why don't you?
SANFORD: Well, I think that what I've said and what a bunch of other folks have said as well, is that, one, there are real strings attached, that I think actually hamper your ability to implement the use of this money. Congressional Budget Office has pointed out the fact that there's a real lag time in actually getting this money into the economy. And I think that the problem that was created with too much debt will never be solved by adding yet more debt. So I think that there are a number of different wrinkles that have caused a number of us to say wait a minute, let's take a look -- a long look at whether or not this really makes sense for our state.
RODRIGUEZ: Even if it takes a while to get the money, how do you justify, let's say, not taking it to your constituents when in your state, for example, in December had the third highest unemployment rate in the country. Don't you need the money?
SANFORD: Again, being against it doesn't preclude taking the money. So again, we're going to look at it, but what you find when you actually begin to look under the hood is that some of those strings attached mean you've got to spend a lot more money that you don't have to be eligible for the funds. For instance, on the unemployment component, you'd have to for the first time offer unemployment benefits to part-time workers. That's something our state has never done. Though the Unemployment Commission itself has gone and asked for $140 million from the feds and asked yet again for $170 million from the feds to keep up our current level of benefits payable.
RODRIGUEZ: You say you're against it, but you still might take the money. Do you realize how some people might think that you're putting ideology ahead of the interests of your constituents?
SANFORD: Well, I'd say it's the reverse. If we take the money -- in other words, I've said -- I've made my ideological stand, saying this is a bad idea-
RODRIGUEZ: But if you're so against it, why take the money?
SANFORD: -don't think -- Because ultimately I represent more -- you know, almost 5 million people in South Carolina and the stand that I take against a bad idea. And again, I've tried to sprinkle as many tacks in the road in terms of trying to slow this freight train that has been coming our country's way that I think will have bad ramifications and will not solve the economy. In fact, it's done the reverse. I think it's effectively frozen up private capital, which is the real economic stimulus of our country. But I've taken those stands. Now when you get to the point where we're at now, it -- we did not stop it. It passed and we're going to take a judicious look at parts that we like, parts that we don't like, all that we like, none that we like, and make a decision here over the weeks ahead.
RODRIGUEZ: Governor, in the last seconds, do you think that the new foreclosure rescue plan will help people in your state?
SANFORD: You know, I suppose you throw enough money at any problem, you're going to help some folks. The question is, will you harm others? Because there are no free lunches in life. And I think that there's a real moral hazard component that goes with doing what is proposed here because a lot of folks that do play by the rules, who have been paying their mortgages, are going to feel like the sucker at the birthday party as the neighbor down the street may end up with benefits that they don't have.
RODRIGUEZ: Governor Mark Sanford, thank you very much for your time this morning.
SANFORD: My pleasure.

ABC Frets NY Post Comic Could Harm 'Post-Racial
Glow' of Obama

Good Morning America reporter David Wright on Thursday worried that a comic strip appearing in Wednesday's New York Post could harm the "post racial glow" that America has been enjoying since Barack Obama's inauguration. Wright recounted the outrage expressed by the Reverend Al Sharpton and others over an editorial cartoon depicting a chimp shot by police and connecting it to the just passed economic stimulus bill.

Wright derided: "Ever since the inauguration, America has seemed to bask in a post-racial glow. But not so fast. Yesterday, the New York Post published a cartoon likening President Obama to a violent monkey shot by police." The GMA journalist chose to accept the most sinister view of the comic, that the dead ape was intended to represent the President. (Of course, since the comic refers to the chimpanzee as the writer of the stimulus bill and Obama didn't author the legislation, that argument doesn't seem to make the most sense.) See New York Post to view cartoon: www.nypost.com (Select February 18.)

Wright featured no one who offered a different interpretation of the cartoon. He simply stated, "The paper refused to apologize for the cartoon, calling it a clear parody of a current news event." Instead, Wright used the controversy as an opportunity to uncritically repeat Attorney General Eric Holder's comments on Wednesday that America is a "nation of cowards." Wright lectured, "Despite evident progress on race, America still has a long way to go, according to the nation's first black attorney general who spoke yesterday at a separate black history month event."

[This item, by the MRC's Scott Whitlock, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

The ABC correspondent also intoned, "It turns out the 2008 election didn't settle the race issue." He then featured a clip of Kevin Alexander Gray, a writer for the very left-wing Progressive. According to Gray, Obama may be the Tiger Woods of politics, "But he's not necessarily going to change the game."

How liberal is Gray? In the October 2008 issue, he contemplated voting for Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney over Barack Obama. Except for an onscreen graphic reading "writer, The Progressive," there was no hint of Gray's radical left views. See The Progressive www.progressive.org

A transcript of the February 19 segment, which aired at 7:18am, follows:

DIANE SAWYER: Anyway, we turn now to the question of race and motive in America. This new political cartoon, sparking controversy this morning. Some people saying that it was a racist attack against the President. Others, just a miscalculation. What do you think? Here's ABC's David Wright.
ABC GRAPHIC: No Laughing Matter: Race in the Obama Era
DAVID WRIGHT: Black history month at the White House is not just a Hallmark holiday this year.
MICHELLE OBAMA [at the White House]: You're yawning. Wake up. I'm just kidding.
WRIGHT: For the first time, the first family is African-American. Ever since the inauguration, America has seemed to bask in a post-racial glow. But not so fast. Yesterday, the New York Post published a cartoon likening President Obama to a violent monkey shot by police.
REVEREND AL SHARPTON: This is a very serious affront. This is race-based. This is offensive.
WRIGHT: The paper refused to apologize for the cartoon, calling it a clear parody of a current news event. Despite evident progress on race, America still has a long way to go, according to the nation's first black attorney general who spoke yesterday at a separate black history month event.
ERIC HOLDER (U.S. attorney general): Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as a ethnic melting pot, in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially, a nation of cowards.
WRIGHT: Conversation about race is edgier these days. This year, for the first time since Al Jolson, Hollywood felt it was safe to nominee a white actor in black face for an Oscar. [Brief "Tropic Thunder" clip]
WRIGHT: It turns out the 2008 election didn't settle the race issue.
KEVIN ALEXANDER GRAY (Writer, The Progressive): I always tell people that Obama is like the Tiger Woods of politics. He wants to wear the green jacket. But he's not necessarily going to change the game.
WRIGHT: Society's deepest divisions don't disappear overnight just because we've made a little progress. For "Good Morning America," David Wright, ABC News, Washington.
ROBERTS: Part of the reason we shied away from the conversation, people are afraid from being labeled a racist or playing the race card. But it's something we all have to move beyond.
SAWYER: Right. And just talk.
ROBERTS: Yes.

CNN Talking Heads Unanimously Praise
Holder's 'Coward' Remarks

Anchor Campbell Brown's show on CNN is subtitled "No Bias, No Bull," but the show displayed plenty of bias in a Wednesday night segment on Attorney General Eric Holder calling America "a nation of cowards" on race issues. Brown praised Holder for "cutting through the bull," and a panel discussion was utterly unanimous: Gloria Borger, Soledad O'Brien, and Roland Martin all toed the liberal line and praised Holder for lambasting the nation. Martin wholeheartedly agreed with Holder's characterization. Borger defended the first black attorney general, stating that he was "trying to be provocative on purpose," while O'Brien thought the Obama appointee was trying to start a "honest conversation" on race.

As for 'cutting through bull,' Brown should have corrected O'Brien when she repeated the old radical line that somehow Black History Month is the shortest month on the calendar due to some racial slight, which completely mangles the facts. It began as "Negro History Week" and was founded by African-American historian Carter Woodson in mid-February to honor Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass, whose birthdays are on the 12th and the 14th respectively.

[This item, by the MRC's Matthew Balan, was posted Thursday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Brown introduced the topic with her praise of Holder and with excerpts from his speech: "On this program, we are all about 'Cutting Through The Bull,' and, for once, somebody in Washington is, too. Today, Attorney General Eric Holder went well beyond paying lip service to the nation's annual observance of February as Black History Month. It would have been easy for him to simply praise African-Americans...But, instead, Holder used his speech at the Department of Justice to demand that Americans confront our unfinished business on the uncomfortable subject of race."

After playing the excerpts, she introduced her guests, and directed her first question to Martin: "What did you think of what he said? Are we a nation of cowards?" Martin replied, "Absolutely....We have segregated schools. We have -- in terms of neighborhoods, churches, and so we have this nice little coexistence. But he's right. We don't want to be forcefully honest about where we stand when it comes to issues of race."

The anchor then asked O'Brien, "So, how do you break that cycle? I mean, you can't legislate it, Soledad." The CNN special correspondent agreed with Brown's assessment, and began her answer with her rant about Black History Month:

O'BRIEN: No, and I don't think he's asking to legislate it. I think what he was saying was -- take this Black History Month, which, frankly, I think a lot of people roll their eyes and say, oh, the shortest month of the year actually gets to be the month devoted to black people -- and let's actually have an honest conversation, where you can say what you're really thinking and I get to say what I'm really thinking, and we can talk about some of the issues that are out there. I think what he was saying was, this is an opportunity. It's going to be painful and it's going to be awkward, to quote him from his speech, but you really can't make progress. And you're looking at demographics, where -- let's throw Latinos into the mix, too -- the country is not going to be majority white in the year 2050. So, we're going to hit that moment and not too far in our future, and if we don't start having some real conversations -- you know, people will often say, I don't see color, and they think that that's a compliment in some way, and I think, why not? Why don't you see color? What you need to do is see color and respect people for who they are, regardless of color. I don't see color means you have very bad eyesight and you have a problem visually, truly.

Brown then turned to Borger, one of CNN's senior political analysts, and made the point that Holder's remarks were "all the more surprising" because he is a "consummate Washington insider." In her reply, Borger focused on how whites apparently reacted to his use of the word "coward" versus how blacks reacted to them:

BORGER: You talk to a lot of white people today, and in response to the word coward -- okay, and they will say that it was needlessly provocative, and that he shouldn't have used the word coward, that maybe he should have used the word fearful. And then you talk to a lot of African-Americans, as did I around our office today, who said, well, that's exactly the word he should use, because he was trying to get people to pay attention, and we wouldn't have paid attention if he had used the word fearful, because that's a word we use all the time --
MARTIN: Thank you. Correct.
BORGER: So, I think he was trying to be provocative on purpose. He now has a platform. He is the first African-American attorney general. He is going to have a very aggressive office of civil rights in his department, and I think what Eric Holder was trying to do -- yes, he's a careful man; yes, he's an insider -- but he also comes to this job as a bit of an outsider, and wanted to start that conversation.

At the end of the segment, the panel turned to the recent New York Post editorial cartoon which referenced the chimpanzee in Connecticut that was shot and killed by police after mauling a person. All three guests agreed that it really was a "clear" racist attack on President Obama:

BROWN: What did you think when you saw it, Soledad?
O'BRIEN: I think it is clearly racist. I think that think that they're -- anytime somebody wants to portray a black person as less than human -- and this is done historically, from early days of the nation -- of this nation -- you portray them as a chimpanzee. That is so classic. So -- and that not only is that -- that cartoon is not even clever. It is not even clever. So, it's clearly -- it's not sort of racist. It's just clearly racist.
BORGER: Stupid.
BROWN: And we're almost out of time, guys, but that was what struck me about it. I mean, it's not like people didn't think of this reference or recognize this reference or understand it, Roland.
MARTIN: Right. It's because we know our history. Now, he had put Congress on the chimpanzee's chest and further explained it. But to say, well, it's a chimp and the Congress and the stimulus. Sorry, we're not buying it. We know it when we see it, and so people need to understand it. And The Post, they continue to make excuses.
BORGER: I found it offensive, Campbell, to me. It was offensive to me.
BROWN: Across the board.
BORGER: Bad.
BROWN: All right, guys, to Gloria, Roland, and Soledad, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

Muslim Wife's Beheading Spiked, But Not
Charge Against Catholic

The founder of a TV network devoted to improve the image of Muslims being charged in the beheading of his wife is not a story the major media have leaped on. On Friday, news broke that Muzzammil Hassan, founder and CEO of Bridges TV, was charged with murdering his wife Aasiya after she filed for divorce. After some Nexis research, here's a listing of major media outlets that have yet to report it: ABC, NBC, NPR, the NewsHour on PBS, USA Today, and The Washington Post.

But on November 12, 1993, all these networks (including NPR) reported within hours on the charges made against Chicago's Catholic cardinal at the time, liberal-leaning Joseph Bernardin, by a 34-year-old AIDS patient, who had just "remembered" he was sexually abused 18 years after the alleged event, and wanted $10 million for his anguish.

[This item, by the MRC's Tim Graham, was posted Thursday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

It led newscasts on CNN and NBC. Connie Chung's sensational introduction on the CBS Evening News typified media reaction: "The Roman Catholic Church in America was rocked today by charges of scandal against one of its most prominent leaders and reformers." (The accuser, Steven Cook, recanted the lawsuit in March of 1994.)

While the Nexis search showed no CBS story on the beheading, MRC's Kyle Drennen found a news report on Wednesday's Early Show. While The Washington Post can't find space for the Muslim beheading story, it published the accusations against Cardinal Bernardin the very next day, with almost 1,000 words on page A-3. USA Today ran a story three days after the story broke.

CNN has offered a handful of stories on the beheading of Aasiya Hassan. But they aired the press conference of Cardinal Bernardin denying the charges live in the middle of the afternoon of November 12, 1993. On November 14, they ran a one-hour special on sex abuse in the Catholic Church two days after the Bernardin charges broke titled Fall From Grace, which continued the sensational coverage of the brand-new allegations. Host Bonnie Anderson reported "Charges that a prince of the Church, a man eligible to become Pope, a Cardinal on the forefront of reforming how the Church deals with clergy's sexual abuse has himself fallen from grace."

CNN triggered the sudden accusations. In her "Public Eye" column in the March 14, 1994 issue of Time, Margaret Carlson reported: "The plaintiff's lawyer had rushed to file the suit in hopes of having it included in an imminent CNN special on priests and sex." For the special, "Cook's charges were added to the program and used to promote it."

Major newspapers who have noticed the Hassan charges have downplayed the Muslim angle. Nexis says the New York Times reported the story on Wednesday with the headline "Upstate Man Charged With Beheading His Estranged Wife." The story began: "A man who founded a Muslim-American television station to help fight Muslim stereotypes is to appear on Wednesday in a suburban Buffalo court on charges that he decapitated his wife last week." (The Washington Edition of the Times we've received here in Virginia has featured no story.)

The Los Angeles Times also arrived on the story on Wednesday in a tiny 81-word article headlined "TV exec accused of beheading wife."

Wire-service reports also omitted the Muslim angle in their headlines. An AP dispatch was headlined "Police: TV exec beheads wife who filed for divorce." A Reuters story was titled "U.S. TV network founder charged with beheading wife."

Sign Up to Receive the MRC's Notable
Quotables Via E-Mail

Another edition of the MRC's new Notable Quotables e-mail will be distributed on Monday. Amongst the category headings: "Applauding Professor Obama's 'Teaching Moment,'" "ABC's Moran: Too Nice Obama 'Got No Honeymoon,'" "Scolding Anti-Spending GOP: 'Where's the Bipartisanship?'" and "Katie Celebrates 'Stimulus' Deal by Giggling with Pelosi."

The new e-mail service is available in two formats: You can receive it as plain text, or in HTML which will feature graphics, images and click-and-play links to video clips. The newest edition will highlight several videos.

To subscribe to either format: www.mrc.org

Note: As a CyberAlert subscriber you will continue to receive Notable Quotables text every other week as a "CyberAlert Special."

The new HTML version of the Notable Quotables e-mail, however, features an eye-pleasing colorful layout with photos, video images and the ability to click to play video clips.

Suggest to any of your friends, relatives or work colleagues -- who might be overwhelmed by daily CyberAlerts but are interested in evidence of the media's left-wing agenda and wildest claims -- that they sign up for the Notable Quotables e-mail so they get a cache of fresh ammunition every other week.

Again, to subscribe to either format: www.mrc.org

-- Brent Baker