Dour Gibson: Only Safe Place for Money is 'Under the Mattress' --7/16/2008

1. Dour Gibson: Only Safe Place for Money is 'Under the Mattress'
Hitting full panic mode on Tuesday night, ABC anchor Charles Gibson teased World News: "Markets are gyrating, inflation is rising, banks are closing. Consumer pessimism is at an all-time high." Actually, only one bank. Gibson explained "we are going to devote a large part of our broadcast tonight to the economy because the news each day seems unrelentingly bad." It certainly is on television news where Gibson brought aboard a group of three experts "to help us separate fact from fear," but they and Gibson spread fear as he put himself in the place of a viewer and wondered: "My house is falling apart, the real estate mortgage companies may be in trouble, and now I hear about possible bank failures. And the stock market is tanking. So how do I be thoughtful about what I do with my money?" An exasperated Gibson soon pleaded: "Tell me where people go now to make sure their money is safe. With stocks down, you think the safest place to do is in the bank, and now we're told that there could be a lot of bank failures. So where do you put your money that you know it's safe? Under the mattress?"

2. NYT: 'Clinton Played to Center, Not Left' in Picking Ginsburg
As opposed to the divisive Bork and Thomas nominations, outgoing New York Times Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse contended Monday, "President Clinton played to the center, not the left, in selecting Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, nominations that were well received in the country and that were confirmed unanimously or nearly so."

3. CBS's Giles Yearns for New Yorker Cover w/ McCain's 'Trophy Wife'
On Tuesday's CBS Early Show, left-wing comedian and CBS commentator Nancy Giles, upset over the Barack Obama New Yorker cover, remarked to co-host Harry Smith: "So is the New Yorker at some point going to do a similar wild interpretation of the rumors about John McCain or have him holding his wife as a trophy, stepping on his ex-wife?" Like MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, who on Monday worried that the magazine cover was "too sophisticated" for the American public to understand, Giles similarly fretted: "But the thing about this particular cartoon is that I think for the people who really already believe that Barack Obama is Muslim...because of the fear that this country has, this will maybe reinforce that fear. They -- I don't think they'll see that as satire." When Smith described how the cartoon was meant to mock Obama's critics, Giles added: "I get that...but I think that there may be people who just look at the cover and see it for what it is."

4. Early Show's Rodriguez Hits McCain from the Left on Immigration
On Tuesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez aired her interview with John McCain that followed his Monday speech to the National Council of La Raza and teased the segment by asking: "Up next, Senator John McCain, a maverick or a flip-flopper to Latinos?" During the interview, Rodriguez, who hosted the liberal La Raza conference, pressed McCain from the left on his immigration stance: "You championed a comprehensive immigration reform bill. But now as the nominee you admit you wouldn't vote for it if it came up today. Why not?" After McCain explained that the legislation had failed twice due to lack of popular support, Rodriguez wondered: "The fact that it failed, does that tell you that the American people didn't want it or that your party didn't want it?" Rodriguez then followed up by quoting Obama campaign talking points: "Some political analysts say, and in fact, Senator Obama made the comments here yesterday, that when you became the nominee, when you could no longer risk alienating your conservative base, you started emphasizing border security over a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. What about that?"

5. RIP, Patricia 'Trish' Buckley Bozell, Member of the MRC Family
The wider Media Research Center family suffered a loss over the weekend with the passing at age 81 of Patricia "Trish" Buckley Bozell, the mother of our founder and President, L. Brent Bozell III.

Dour Gibson: Only Safe Place for Money
is 'Under the Mattress'

Hitting full panic mode on Tuesday night, ABC anchor Charles Gibson teased World News: "Markets are gyrating, inflation is rising, banks are closing. Consumer pessimism is at an all-time high." Actually, only one bank. Gibson explained "we are going to devote a large part of our broadcast tonight to the economy because the news each day seems unrelentingly bad." It certainly is on television news where Gibson brought aboard a group of three experts "to help us separate fact from fear," but they and Gibson spread fear as he put himself in the place of a viewer and wondered: "My house is falling apart, the real estate mortgage companies may be in trouble, and now I hear about possible bank failures. And the stock market is tanking. So how do I be thoughtful about what I do with my money?"

An exasperated Gibson soon pleaded: "Tell me where people go now to make sure their money is safe. With stocks down, you think the safest place to do is in the bank, and now we're told that there could be a lot of bank failures. So where do you put your money that you know it's safe? Under the mattress?"

[This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [1] ]

After one guest had declared "we've got serious problems," the second insisted "if things don't turn around, we don't have that many policy arrows left in our quiver" and Mellody Hobson of Aerial Investments maintained "it's very, very hard for individual people to see through this pain right now," Hobson herself pointed out the obvious which the segment helped fuel: "Pessimism prevails in this market, from the newspapers to the headlines to the television."

That led Gibson to observe "you think a lot of the fundamentals of the economy are sound. So how much of this is fear? And how much of this is fact?" Nonetheless, after that brief sojourn into realizing the media-fed fear, Gibson forwarded his put your money under a mattress suggestion.

The NBC Nightly News was comparatively rational, but CBS's Katie Couric was nearly as panicked as Gibson. With "financial FEARS" on screen, Couric led the July 15 CBS Evening News: "Good evening, everyone. President Bush tried today to reassure the country about the economy. He said it is growing, if slowly. It's a tough sell as the bad economic news just keeps coming. In fact, a CBS News/New York Times poll finds two out of three Americans [67 percent] believe the economy is getting worse. The latest bad news? Inflation, the worst in decades. Retail sales, Americans are cutting way back. And so is General Motors. Then there's that upsetting scene we've been witnessing, Americans lining up to pull their money out of a failed bank."

Yes, one single bank.

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the roundtable on ABC's World News for Tuesday, July 15:

CHARLES GIBSON: Because of all the fear that seems to exist, this afternoon we brought together a group of experts to help us separate fact from fear. Our experts, Anne Mathias. She's a senior vice president at Stanford Group. She's an expert in pension issues. Louis Alexander is the chief economist at CITI, and Mellody Hobson is the President of Aerial Investments. So let me start with a general question. How much trouble are we in? How long are we going to be in trouble? Is it grave? Is it moderate? What? Lou?
LOUIS ALEXANDER, CITI: We've got serious problems, I think, with respect to the financial system. There are ongoing issues that are quite significant. The economy is doing reasonably well, given those headlines, but we're facing big problems.
GIBSON: Ann?
ANNE MATHIAS, STANFORD GROUP COMPANY: I would agree. I think that we're in a position where monetary policy has been used up. We've cut rates. The Fed has been incredibly creative lately. They've put in place all new different kinds of new structures to lend money, to take new types of collateral. And if things don't turn around, we don't have that many policy arrows left in our quiver, really.
GIBSON: That doesn't sound good. Both those answers sound like it's on the grave side.
MELLODY HOBSON, ARIEL INVESTMENTS: On of top of that, everyday people are hurting. It's very hard to make ends meet in this country right now. People's credit cards are maxed out. Obviously, we know the story with the gas tank and the $4 milk. All of those things have come at, it couldn't have come at a worse time. And I think it's very, very hard for individual people to see through this pain right now.
GIBSON: My house is falling apart, the real estate mortgage companies may be in trouble, and now I hear about possible bank failures. And the stock market is tanking. So how do I be thoughtful about what I do with my money?
HOBSON: Charlie, last week, Sir John Templeton passed away, who was one of the greatest investors of all time. And what he did, which was remarkable, was during World War II, in the midst of the war, he went in and bought every stock on the New York Stock Exchange that was selling for $1 or less. That took enormous courage. This is a time, and he has said this better than anyone else, you buy at the point of maximum pessimism. Pessimism prevails in this market, from the newspapers to the headlines to the television. Wherever you look there's bad news. But if you can understand, you can make a tremendous amount of money. If you have courage to go against the grain in this market, you can do very well over the long-term.
GIBSON: Lou, I'm glad she raised that because when you read this, you think a lot of the fundamentals of the economy are sound. So how much of this is fear? And how much of this is fact?
ALEXANDER: It's definitely a combination. There are some significant challenges. But I think what you're seeing in markets is, in many respects, an overreaction. I think it's clear that housing prices are going to continue to go down, and that's created uncertainty in the financial sector. But I think it's gone beyond that. If you look at sort of where bank stocks are trading at this point. They rely on confidence. And I think that's in short supply now, in large part because there isn't total certainty about where all of this is going.
HOBSON: Most people don't have a lot of courage in this situation. And, you know, quite frankly, when it doesn't work out, they get fired.
GIBSON: Tell me where people go now to make sure their money is safe. With stocks down, you think the safest place to do is put it in the bank. And now we're told that there could be a lot of bank failures. So where do you put your money that you know it's safe? Under the mattress?
MATHIAS: Well, I think my kids would find it under a mattress unfortunately, but there are things you can do. One of our analysts today was talking to me about basically buying CDs that are offered from the brokerage firm. You can open accounts at different banks if you are so inclined, and keep each account under $100,000 in a bank.
GIBSON: And, Lou, when your neighbors say to you, "What in the world do I do?" what do you say to them?
ALEXANDER: I do think it does require that people be careful about what they're doing. But there are lots of low-risk opportunities. In addition to spreading your money around in banks, in the way that it's been described, you've got government bonds. I would argue in many respects, you've seen somewhat higher interest rates recently, somewhat counterintuitively. That actually presents a good opportunity, as well. So there are options for people. But they've got to be aware of what they're doing.

NYT: 'Clinton Played to Center, Not Left'
in Picking Ginsburg

As opposed to the divisive Bork and Thomas nominations, outgoing New York Times Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse contended Monday, "President Clinton played to the center, not the left, in selecting Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, nominations that were well received in the country and that were confirmed unanimously or nearly so."

Greenhouse is retiring after almost 30 years covering the Supreme Court for the Times, and is taking questions from readers this week at nytimes.com. One insight: Greenhouse will apparently go into retirement thinking that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an ACLU lawyer and chief litigator for its Women's Rights Project, is a centrist jurist.

[This item, by Clay Waters, was posted Tuesday on the MRC's TimesWatch site: www.timeswatch.org [2] ]

Here's how Greenhouse answered a question on how the ideology of Supreme Court justices shift once they're draped in the robes of the highest court in the land, and whether that makes Senate confirmation hearings obsolete:

It's hard to generalize about the confirmation process. Each Supreme Court nomination/confirmation has its own dynamic, depending on which seat is being filled, what the relationship is between the President and the Senate, how the President chooses to use the nomination power, and what issues are most salient in the country at the time. Nominations get in trouble when the President tries to use them to push beyond the boundaries of the existing political consensus. That was the Bork nomination problem. It was also the first Bush administration's problem with the Clarence Thomas nomination -- which of course succeeded, unlike the Bork nomination, but succeeded only barely and after a rough fight. By contrast, President Clinton played to the center, not the left, in selecting Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, nominations that were well received in the country and that were confirmed unanimously or nearly so. So it's really up to the President to decide at the outset how to play it.

END of Excerpt

The Q & A posted July 14: www.nytimes.com [3]

Republicans didn't go after Ginsburg or Breyer with anything resembling the viciousness the left employed again Reagan's failed nominee Robert Bork or Bush Sr.'s successful one, Clarence Thomas, but Greenhouse missed those details.

The Times has often denied Ginsburg's liberalism from the start, as demonstrated by this headline from June 27, 1993 after her nomination by President Clinton: "Balanced Jurist at Home in the Middle."

In her coverage, Greenhouse sometimes referred to Ginsburg's liberalism, albeit as relatively liberal compared to the rest of a "conservative"-dominated Supreme Court, calling Ginsburg one of the Court's "more liberal members" or "most liberal members" or "increasingly marginalized liberals."

For much more on bias in the New York Times, check in regularly with the MRC's TimesWatch site: www.timeswatch.org [4]

CBS's Giles Yearns for New Yorker Cover
w/ McCain's 'Trophy Wife'

On Tuesday's CBS Early Show, left-wing comedian and CBS commentator Nancy Giles, upset over the Barack Obama New Yorker cover, remarked to co-host Harry Smith: "So is the New Yorker at some point going to do a similar wild interpretation of the rumors about John McCain or have him holding his wife as a trophy, stepping on his ex-wife?" Like MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, who on Monday worried that the magazine cover was "too sophisticated" for the American public to understand, Giles similarly fretted: "But the thing about this particular cartoon is that I think for the people who really already believe that Barack Obama is Muslim...because of the fear that this country has, this will maybe reinforce that fear. They -- I don't think they'll see that as satire." When Smith described how the cartoon was meant to mock Obama's critics, Giles added: "I get that...but I think that there may be people who just look at the cover and see it for what it is."

[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [5] ]

For Andrea Mitchell seeing Americans as too dumb to understand cartoon, check the July 15 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org [6]

For his part, Smith actually defended the New Yorker and suggested the Obama campaign was overeacting: "Why's everybody going crazy about this?...Front page story in the New York Times this morning is people are trying to figure out what's funny about this campaign and so far nothing has been funny about Obama. Is Obama off-limits?...what we're returning to the age of absolute political correctness?"

Giles made some suggestions on how the New Yorker could have improved the cartoon: "Or maybe I read this on a blog, as a thought bubble of like the right wingers, like 'ooh, this is our fantasy, that he really is that.' Or of the Obamas watching, seeing that image on TV while they're eating apple pie and there really this all-American family, It might have just straightened it out a little bit. You know?"

Here is the full transcript of the July 16 segment:

7:20AM TEASER:
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Coming up, more on the magazine cover everyone is talking about, is it funny? We'll ask a comedian.

7:30AM TEASER:
RODRIGUEZ: Remember these cartoons in the New Yorker? [picture of President Bush as a maid cleaning up after Cheney] they're by Barry Blitt, the same guy who did the cartoon that's now sparking intense outrage with Barack Obama and his wife dressed as radicals. Ahead this morning we'll talk to a comedian who says no matter how you feel about the cartoon the timing is just plain wrong.

7:30AM SEGMENT:
HARRY SMITH: Let's talk about that New Yorker cover that everybody in the country seems to be talking about. Nancy Giles, commentator from Sunday Morning is with us this morning.
NANCY GILES: Hey, Harry.
SMITH: How are you?
GILES: I'm fine.
SMITH: You know, the New Yorker is very interesting because David Remnick came out yesterday. He's been the editor of the magazine for ten years.
GILES: Right.
SMITH: Couldn't be more successful. Smart stuff in had that magazine. He says, listen, these are 'fantastical images about the Obamas and shows them for the obvious distortions they are.' Why's everybody going crazy about this? Does it make you crazy?
GILES: It did make me crazy and I'm an admirer of the New Yorker, I used to subscribe. I mean, I stopped subscribing not because of this particular cartoon, but because they have these great articles that sometimes are 40 and 50 pages long and I would burst into tears because I'd never finish them.
SMITH: [Laughter] Okay.
GILES: But the thing about this particular cartoon is that I think for the people who really already believe that Barack Obama is Muslim, and by the way, if he was Muslim, there shouldn't be a problem with that. We should have religious freedom in this country.
SMITH: Right.
GILES: But because of the fear that this country has, this will maybe reinforce that fear. They -- I don't think they'll see that as satire. And the interesting thing is the title of the cartoon is 'The Politics of Fear.'
SMITH: Right.
GILES: Even if that were somehow maybe on the cover or, you know, I wouldn't want to try to tell the cartoonist how to do his piece.
SMITH: But clearly, it was not intended to make fun of the Obamas. This was-
GILES: Right. Satirize-
SMITH: -intended to satire those who would portray them in the way the cartoon shows them.
GILES: Right, absolutely, I get that. I get that-
SMITH: Right, okay-
GILES: -but I think that there may be people who just look at the cover and see it for what it is. I mean, there's so many elements that could really get somebody, a framed picture of Osama Bin Laden on the wall-
SMITH: Flag burning in the fireplace
GILES: A burning American flag.
SMITH: Yeah.
GILES: Michelle Obama with a fro and an AK-47. And you know, I mean, there's a lot going on there. And you've got to wonder, like, is the New Yorker -- this is a candidate. This isn't a guy that's already president.
SMITH: Right.
GILES: So is the New Yorker at some point going to do a similar wild interpretation of the rumors about John McCain or have him holding his wife as a trophy, stepping on his ex-wife? Something like -- I mean, you know, I'm just -- I'm you know-
SMITH: Sure.
GILES: -or when Bush was a candidate-
SMITH: Well, it becomes -- it brings up the subject of what is or isn't fair game.
GILES: Right.
SMITH: Front page story in the New York Times this morning is people are trying to figure out what's funny about this campaign and so far nothing has been funny about Obama. Is Obama off-limits?
GILES: No, I don't think that that's true. And I have a very good sense of humor. And years ago I used to be at Second City, which is in Chicago, which is a famous political satirical comedy group.
SMITH: Right. Yes.
GILES: I would have died to have played somebody like Michelle Obama-
SMITH: Yeah-
GILES: Once -- either now or when she's president. But Second City gives you-
SMITH: When she's president?
GILES: 'When she's president' [fake cough] I -- you know-
SMITH: Okay, I understood what you meant.
GILES: When she's First Lady. Second City gives you already the context of comedy and satire so you know going in what you're going to get. This was just -- it's so much more confusing.
SMITH: Yeah?
GILES: Considering, I think-
SMITH: You know, the blogosphere-
GILES: Even if-
SMITH: Is filled with all of this stuff-
GILES: I know.
SMITH: I'm sitting there saying so we have -- what we're returning to the age of absolute political correctness, that-
GILES: No, no, no. Because even years ago they had a political cartoon of Grover Cleveland, who was suspected of having a kid out of wedlock-
SMITH: Yeah.
GILES: And there's this very famous cartoon going 'I want my ma,' of him, you know, the baby-
SMITH: Yeah, sure.
GILES: -it always existed. But this, without the context of that particular title, 'The Politics of Fear.' Or maybe I read this on a blog, as a thought bubble of like the right wingers, like 'ooh, this is our fantasy, that he really is that.' Or of the Obamas watching, seeing that image on TV while they're eating apple pie and there really this all-American family, It might have just straightened it out a little bit. You know?
SMITH: Right, yeah.
GILES: I, its-
SMITH: Maybe they need editing.
GILES: Yeah, maybe.
SMITH: That sounds -- you're doing your own edit. We all do our own edits.
GILES: I know, I know, flesh it out.
SMITH: Nancy Giles, great to see you.
GILES: You too, thank you.
SMITH: Thanks for coming in.

Early Show's Rodriguez Hits McCain from
the Left on Immigration

On Tuesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez aired her interview with John McCain that followed his Monday speech to the National Council of La Raza and teased the segment by asking: "Up next, Senator John McCain, a maverick or a flip-flopper to Latinos?" During the interview, Rodriguez, who hosted the liberal La Raza conference, pressed McCain from the left on his immigration stance: "You championed a comprehensive immigration reform bill. But now as the nominee you admit you wouldn't vote for it if it came up today. Why not?" After McCain explained that the legislation had failed twice due to lack of popular support, Rodriguez wondered: "The fact that it failed, does that tell you that the American people didn't want it or that your party didn't want it?"

Rodriguez then followed up by quoting Obama campaign talking points: "Some political analysts say, and in fact, Senator Obama made the comments here yesterday, that when you became the nominee, when you could no longer risk alienating your conservative base, you started emphasizing border security over a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. What about that?"

[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [7] ]

Read about Rodriguez touting her role as emcee for the La Raza conference. See the July 14 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org [8]

When McCain later suggested that: "Americans want the confidence that we'll have secure borders. And then I believe the overwhelming majority of them will support a humane and compassionate approach to temporary worker program and to a comprehensive immigration reform." Rodriguez responded: "But securing the border could take years. What if it never happens? When will you get to comprehensive immigration reform?"

That comment led to this exchange in which an incredulous Rodriguez could not seem to accept that the United States would actually be capable of securing its own borders:

MCCAIN: Oh, we are moving forward right now with securing our borders.
RODRIGUEZ: If in one year or two years the border isn't secure, what will you do?
MCCAIN: It'll be secure-
RODRIGUEZ: It'll be secure?
MCCAIN: It'll be secure, sure. It'll be secure in a very relatively short period of time.
RODRIGUEZ: Like a year?
MCCAIN: It'll be done in a very short period of time.

Rodriguez ended the segment by confessing that immigration was not the only issue on the minds of Hispanic voters: "While immigration is an important issue, especially symbolically and emotionally for Latinos, it is not the most important. In a new CBS News/New York Times poll out this morning, 45% of Hispanics see the economy as the country's most important problem, 18% say the war in Iraq, and just 3% say immigration."

Rodriguez began the interview by asking McCain about the depiction of Obama on the cover of the New Yorker: "Have you seen the cover of the New Yorker?...Your feeling, is satire acceptable?" On the economy, Rodriguez asked about a bailout plan for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and wondered: "How much blame should the Bush Administration take for that?"

Here is the full transcript of the July 16 segment:

7:00AM TEASER:
HARRY SMITH: Exclusive. That controversial cover.
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Have you seen the cover of the New Yorker?
SMITH: What John McCain told Maggie.

7:01AM TEASER:
RODRIGUEZ: Also ahead this morning, is the cover of the New Yorker magazine indirectly helping John McCain? I asked the Senator about that in my interview. We also talk about what he says is the risk that almost killed his campaign and the banking crisis. My exclusive one-on-one interview is straight ahead.

7:13AM TEASER:
RODRIGUEZ: Up next, Senator John McCain, a maverick or a flip-flopper to Latinos? And what he says about Barack Obama's controversial magazine cover. We go one-on-one in an exclusive.

7:17AM SEGMENT:
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Yesterday in San Diego I met up with Senator John McCain at a luncheon I hosted where he spoke to thousands of Latinos. And just like the day before when I hosted the same event with Senator Obama, the issue that drew the most passionate response from this key electorate was immigration. But another key item of the day was the recent cover of the New Yorker magazine, depicting Barack Obama as a Muslim, playing on the myths and fears about the Democratic candidate. I asked Senator McCain about it in my exclusive interview. I would like to ask you a news of the day question, if I may.
MCCAIN: Sure.
RODRIGUEZ: Have you seen the cover of the New Yorker?
JOHN MCCAIN: Yes.
RODRIGUEZ: Your feeling, is satire acceptable?
MCCAIN: I don't think so. I'll leave that judgment to the American people. I can only state my personal opinion. I think it's -- if it's an attempt at satire it's wrong -- it's wrong and it's offensive.
RODRIGUEZ: In regard to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, do you feel that a government bailout is the solution?
MCCAIN: I think the proposal that has been made, which I don't call a, quote, 'bailout,' but certainly is significant assistance in a number of ways, is an appropriate measure to take. Americans are angry. They're angry and they're upset and they're sick and tired of Washington doing nothing for them.
RODRIGUEZ: How much blame should the Bush Administration take for that?
MCCAIN: I think that the problem has been festering for many, many, many years. Fannie and Freddie were not created by the Bush Administration. When you look at some of the congressional action and lack of oversight by the administration, by Congress, by everybody, then it's been a failure that there's plenty of blame to go around.
RODRIGUEZ: You championed a comprehensive immigration reform bill. But now as the nominee you admit you wouldn't vote for it if it came up today. Why not?
MCCAIN: The point is not that I would vote for it or not vote for it, the point is it failed twice. Senator Kennedy and I and a group of senators brought it up twice and it failed twice.
RODRIGUEZ: The fact that it failed, does that tell you that the American people didn't want it or that your party didn't want it?
MCCAIN: The American people didn't support it. I still believe that we reflect the views of the majority.
RODRIGUEZ: Some political analysts say, and in fact, Senator Obama made the comments here yesterday, that when you became the nominee, when you could no longer risk alienating your conservative base, you started emphasizing border security over a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. What about that?
MCCAIN: Actually, as soon as we failed I said that we obviously had for the second time. I led on the issue. I didn't have to do this, Maggie. I knew that it was going to hurt me in my quest for the nomination of my party because it was not popular with a lot of the base of my party. But it's because I put my country first, and I always put my country first. Senator Obama had a choice of doing the bidding of the labor unions or putting his country first. He chose the special interests, Senator Obama supported measures which would have killed the comprehensive approach.
RODRIGUEZ: What do you say to the American worker who feels that the undocumented worker is taking his or her job?
MCCAIN: I agree with him. But I would also point out that there are jobs that it is clear that still need to be filled. Americans want the confidence that we'll have secure borders. And then I believe the overwhelming majority of them will support a humane and compassionate approach to temporary worker program and to a comprehensive immigration reform.
RODRIGUEZ: But securing the border could take years. What if it never happens? When will you get to comprehensive immigration reform?
MCCAIN: Oh, we are moving forward right now with securing our borders.
RODRIGUEZ: If in one year or two years the border isn't secure, what will you do?
MCCAIN: It'll be secure-
RODRIGUEZ: It'll be secure?
MCCAIN: It'll be secure, sure. It'll be secure in a very relatively short period of time.
RODRIGUEZ: Like a year?
MCCAIN: It'll be done in a very short period of time.
RODRIGUEZ: While immigration is an important issue, especially symbolically and emotionally for Latinos, it is not the most important. In a new CBS News/New York Times poll out this morning, 45% of Hispanics see the economy as the country's most important problem, 18% say the war in Iraq, and just 3% say immigration. I should note that I also gave Senator Obama the opportunity to discuss issues important to Latino voters, but his campaign declined.

RIP, Patricia 'Trish' Buckley Bozell,
Member of the MRC Family

The wider Media Research Center family suffered a loss over the weekend with the passing at age 81 of Patricia "Trish" Buckley Bozell, the mother of our founder and President, L. Brent Bozell III.

I met and talked with her several times since the MRC's founding and found her delightful, with an upbeat attitude and always excited to help me and others with the editing of a book project or offering advice on the best way to construct sentences to make our intended points clear. She sometimes fretted that she had fallen behind a promised deadline and worried about how it might impact us -- when we were the beneficiaries of her editing wisdom.

Her life earned a picture and plug, on the front of the Tuesday Washington Post "Metro" section, for her obituary. For "Patricia Buckley Bozell, 81; Activist Founded a Catholic Opinion Journal," by Adam Bernstein, go to: www.washingtonpost.com [9]

National Review Online has posted a "symposium" of several tributes to her. Here are two of them I found the most meaningful:

# Bill Rusher, former publisher of National Review and the former Chairman of the MRC Board of Directors:

Trish Bozell was one of the liveliest and warmest women I have ever known. Her smile could warm up the coldest room.

She was working in tandem with her brother when I joined NR in 1957, and continued to do so for several years. She was a highly competent writer and editor, and I know that Bill relied on her heavily. They were extremely close, and almost laughably alike in many ways.

When family responsibilities finally forced her to step down, we were all desolate. Thereafter I watched as she managed the growth of her ten children'€"all of whom matured into political carbon copies of herself, her brother Bill, and the other siblings in that wonderful family.

If I had to single out one characteristic of her personality, I think it would be her conviviality. Any group of people seemed to become almost automatically more vivacious when Trish joined it.

It is touching, but not surprising, that she followed Bill so soon after his death. They were, and all their lives remained, a team. My condolences go to her family and her many friends. May she find in Heaven the welcome she deserves.

# Jack Fowler, publisher of National Review:

....When I found out she was dying I wrote her to say just what I thought about her, and she wrote back: "Okay, so I love you too -- from the very first when we peered around the Madison Hotel searching each other out for our first meeting. Nothing came of the book (which is too bad, I think) but what did emerge overpowers anything else -- my love for you. Which endures. And will continue to endure. I told Bill when he said a few days before his death that he was dying that I wouldn't be far behind. And Voila! Bill never was one for patience."

Boy, did he ever love her, and vice versa. And why not? Especially as both had an impish gene. This from Bill's Miles Gone By, recounting the Buckley children at play, horsing around at a horse show, with the high and mighty:

Some of the horse shows were also social occasions, calling for elaborate picnics and forms of fraternization. Every year in Rhinebeck, New York, a few miles north of Hyde Park, the box alongside my father's was occupied by the president of the United States, who played the country squire at least once every season at the Duchess County Horse Show. I remember the afternoon when Trish won the blue ribbon. Protocol requires the winner to ride around the ring to receive the plaudits of the spectators. When she rode by the president's box, FDR applauded lustily, whereupon Trish abruptly turned her pigtailed head to one side. A moment later, blue ribbon and riding crop in one hand, she came buoyantly to the family box.

"Why didn't you nod to the president?" my father whispered to her.

"I thought you didn't like him!" Trish's face was pained with surprise.

It's not everyone who can claim to have flipped a pigtail at FDR. As for pained looks of surprise, surely there was no cause for that when she received her Eternal Reward this weekend. If anyone deserved V.I.P access, it's Trish. Well, holy and impish and lovely lady, wonderful mother and grandmother and wife and sibling and friend, good bye. Your newfound happiness swamps any sadness we might have. And if you don't mind, given your proximity to The Ear, keep putting in a good word for us as you have been these many years.

For the entire set of tributes: article.nationalreview.com [10]

-- Brent Baker