The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Ayotte. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ayotte. Show all posts

Friday, November 8, 2013

60 Minutes Fires Continue.....

....and "fires" is what happens when the nation and its media moves to the Right.  



When media moves Right it is without exception in pursuit of revenue yielding ratings that have prove lucrative. Two classic examples are Premiere Network's and Limbaugh's daily racist, sexist homophobic and anti-progressive "derangement" and Fox New's early morning and evening anti-Obama insanity. Both work to return sponsor dollars to Premiere and Fox while feeding lies and misinformation to their ravenous viewers and listeners.

During 2013, we have observed other tepid toe-in-the-water exhibits of misinformation broadcasts from ABC and NBC, along with the astronomically 'cheap' and unprofessional 60 Minutes Benghazi episode. 

Media Matters has followed the 60 Minutes debacle since its first broadcast. David Brock, Media Matters, sat for a discussion of 60 minutes and the mindset that leads to such journalistic miscarriages. 

http://mediamatters.org/video

Earlier today Media Matter's Eric Bohlert blogged about, "How CBS Could Have Avoided The 60 Minutes Benghazi Fiasco."  

Bohlert's piece is 'point-on' regarding an avoidable fiasco precipitated by violating the former standards of network and 60 Minutes executives. 

About the time David Brock was speaking with Al Sharpton on MSNBC's Politics Nation, Media Matters's Joe Strupp published a piece that completes the cycle on 60 Minutes (management, producers and host Lara Logan) foray into the unfathomable.  The network 'played' to ratings and pandered to Benghazi derangement that continues to serve as "the anti-Obama, anti-Hillary, issue of the decade.  The Right is, as you and I know, politicking towards 2016. The media follows Graham, McCain, Issa, Ayotte and others like subservient ducklings nipping-up ratings tidbits of like ducklings nipping morsels from pavement.
Mary Mapes
Former 60 Minutes producer Mary Mapes, who was fired for her role in a controversial 2004 story about President Bush's service in the Air National Guard, accused CBS News of pandering to a right-wing audience with her former program's recent Benghazi report, for which the network has been criticized and forced to retract.
"My concern is that the story was done very pointedly to appeal to a more conservative audience's beliefs about what happened at Benghazi," Mapes said by telephone from her Texas home. "They appear to have done that story to appeal specifically to a politically conservative audience that is obsessed with Benghazi and believes that Benghazi was much more than a tragedy."

The problem with 60 Minutes is in the capable hands of the media monitoring organization: Media Matters. It doesn't take an imagination to know that the Benghazi broadcast was to be a ratings boom. A boom at the expense of truth and credibility for the once storied news magazine. But, those issues pale in comparison to the real danger: Media callousness in seeking ratings and false communication to the viewing public.


As evidence in the Politics Nation piece above, Republican "Banghazi firebrands" and Fox News are continuing to use the story as fodder for low information people who obviously relish Obama Derangement. As stated by Al Sharpton, Fox News has not addressed the two week fizzle of the Dylan Davies story beyond their references to its original broadcast on 60 Minutes. What we ask, what is that other than a form of Fox News propaganda?
StumbleUpon

Monday, April 29, 2013

Blocking Background Checks Proves A Poll Ratings Approval Killer!


From left, Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. Polls show Begich and Flake suffered dips in popularity following their gun votes.
From left, Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. Polls show Begich and Flake suffered dips in popularity following their gun votes.

"May the Force work against you." The Pardu

The Senatorial vote that did not allow a background check to bill to come to full Senate vote is haunting some Senators who 'ran interference' for the NRA and gun lobbyist.   Joe Scarborough  Morning Joe MSNBC, spoke specifically about potential electoral troubles for Kelly Ayotte (R) New Hampshire.

Public Policy Polling (PPP) ran a piece this morning related to Senators who voted against their  the preferences of their constituents.  The PPP piece focuses on survey data in four states Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, and Ohio) that shows lowered approval numbers.  Five Senators are identified by PPP as suffering most from their votes.

Jeff Flake (R) Arizona three months in office and already has a signing "A" Rating from the NRA.
Lisa Murkowski  (D) Alaska, precipitous drop in approval rating based on her vote.
Mark Begich (D)  Alaska. 
Rob Partman (R) Ohio.
Dean Heller  (R) Nevada.

The survey was a conducted on April 25 and 26th, and the tool included respondent numbers that indicate a good sampling: 1,000 voters in Alaska, 600 in Arizona, 500 in Nevada and 600 in Ohio.  The PPP piece linked above provides details about the dwindling approval ratings of the Senators.  Of particular note is the disapproval of the elected officials crosses party-lines.  Maybe, the American public is awakening to its power, if power is concerted and exercised.

Mediaite published a piece on just after noon today with specific information about how the background check 'blocking' has hit those who voted against the bill. 
Last week, a Public Policy Polling survey showed that Sen.Kelly Ayotte‘s “no” vote on background checks could cost her dearly in the next election, and that was before Gabby Giffords started twisting the knife.  A new PPP poll shows that “no” votes from Senators Jeff Flake (R-AZ, NRA rating=A), Lisa Murkowski(R-AK, NRA rating=A), Mark Begich (D-AK,NRA rating=D), Rob Portman (R-OH, NRA rating=A), and Dean Heller (R-NV, NRA rating=A) have dropped them into varying degrees of hot water with voters. 
* 52% of (Arizona) voters say they’re less likely to support Flake in a future election because of this vote, compared to only 19% who say they’re more likely to. 
* Additionally voters say by a 21 point margin, 45/24, that they trust senior colleague John McCain more than Flake when it comes to gun issues. 
* Lisa Murkowski’s approval is down a net 16 points from that +21 standing (in February) to +5 with 46% of voters approving and 41% now disapproving of her. 
* 39% of (Alaska) voters say they’re less likely to vote for each of Begich and Murkowski in their next elections based on this vote, while only 22% and 26% say they’re more likely to vote for Begich and Murkowski respectively because of this. 
* Rob Portman’s approval has dropped a net 18 points over the last 6 months from +10 (35/25) in October to now -8 (26/34) in April. 
* 36% of voters in Ohio say they’re less likely to support Portman in a future election because of this vote to only 19% who consider it to be a reason to support him. 
* Nevada’s Dean Heller has seen a more modest decline in his approval numbers, from 47/42 right before the election to 44/41 now. However with the independent voters who were critical to his narrow victory in November, his approval has dropped from 52/37 then to now 42/42. 
* 46% say they’re less likely to support Heller the next time he’s up for reelection compared to only 25% who are more likely to because of this vote, and as we saw last fall Heller has very little margin for error.
While poll numbers indicate disapproval regarding the background check 'blocking', readers should be aware of another reality.  There are probably high numbers of voters in some districts who welcomed the background checking 'blocking' from the Senate.  A fact clearly obvious with Senator Lindsay Graham apparently catching no "polling hell" from his no vote. 

Ayotte is a particular intriguing study of the aftermath of her actions against background checks.   Mediaite provides an enlightening analysis of Ayotte's disapproval ratings.
As you might expect, there’s a huge partisan gap in the democratic polling firm’s survey, with 79% of Democrats saying they’d be less likely to vote for Ayotte over her “no” vote, versus 17% of Republicans, but with all-important independents, the 50% number holds strong. Only 23% of independents said the vote would make them more likely to vote for Sen. Ayotte, with 26% saying it wouldn’t make a difference. Sen. Ayotte’s approval rating has also taken a nosedive since the last PPP poll: 
Ayotte now has a negative approval rating with 44% of voters giving her good marks and 46% disapproving. That’s down a net 15 points from the last time we polled on her, in October, when she had a 48% approval with 35% disapproving. 75% of New Hampshire voters- including 95% of Democrats, 74% of independents, and 56% of Republicans- say they support background checks. And 50% of voters in the state say Ayotte’s ‘no’ vote will make them less likely to support her in a future election, compared to just 23% who consider it to be a positive.
Ayotte won her seat in 2010 by 23 points. But in a very early hypothetical match up between her and new Democratic Governor Maggie Hassan, she trails by a 46/44 margin. This issue is really giving her some trouble.
Keep in mind, too, that this poll was taken before Gabby Giffords‘ Americans For Responsible Solutions began running this ad in New Hampshire, released Wednesday morning:

All said, the power of money in Us politics has gone way too far.  Members of congressional houses both state and federal are  in one way of another, hobnobbing with lobbyist who provide vital campaign funds , and un-politically correct (to write), other funds. We published over the weekend about an event planner for the upcoming Koch Brothers event in Palm Springs, CA. The event includes a documented passage in an email secured by Mother Jones of event planning that includes recruiting legislature candidates with sympathetic views.  I wonder if sympathetic views means, unscrupulous enough to allow money to guide their every consideration, deliberation and vote once in congress.  By now you know the event is the annual Koch Bothers, "Billionaires Donors Club" or "Billionaires Caucus" event.  Do you have thoughts that billionaires might meet to build strategy on policy, proactive and procedure beneficial to the middle and lower income strata?

If you answered "no" to the question, you are probably of sane mind and realize the "no" votes which are garnering the dwindling approval ratings were cast without regard for public opinion.
StumbleUpon

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Hypocrisy And Political Posturing Reigns: Jon Stewart and Rachel Maddow Speak Out

  
.....And they are certainly 3 dimensional, while lost in a  room of mirrors.
McCain, Graham and Ayotte have become obvious hench people in the game of American politics.  The hypocrisy exudes with every utterance and camera appearance.   



Rachel Maddow  delves deeper wand with intellectual acuity we have grown to expect.   The Rachel Maddow Show, TRMS, November, 28. 


Somewhere between the two media personalities, it should be obvious to the opened-minded the issue is exaggerate, has happened before without heir angst and the issue is showing the three as political operatives.
   
While I have been unabashed about comment that Rice should never have been a spokesperson on the issue, I have to place the current political pandering in perspective garbage and embarrassing for the three Senators. John McCain is showing signs of obvious "over-the-hill" effectiveness as a Senator. Graham is reinforcing his 'lap-dog' tendencies when it comes to all things McCain. And, I honestly feel Ayotte is along for the ride for purpose of gender.  Her role on Congressional committees is one thing, her locked-in-step with McCain/Graham could prove damaging to her credibility.  McCain and Graham are like the old dog that insist of running after moving cars chasing and nipping at the tires.  After the selection of Sarah Palin as a running mate, were I a remember of the GOP and approached by McCain for service as an ally, I'd find a quick reason to visit the restroom.

One last point. Can you think of any international incident or international issue that McCain and Graham have shown any degree of credibility?
     
StumbleUpon

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Rice, Conspiracy and The Three Musketeers Via Maddow


I thought of writing a screed around this segment from the TRMS.  It took me only a few seconds to realize, there is no need to accompany Maddow's work with serious verbiage.  Obviously, I feel her work has merit.

Watch these crafty Republicans at work!   If you will pay close attention to Maddow's retort to McCain's asinine analogy of the bin Laden raid, it is apparent the Viet Nam War former POW places himself squarely in the spotlight of "needs to retire" from the US Senate. His rationale is as ridiculous as hearing a former GOP VP candidate attempt to explain Paul Revere. 




Is it true 47% of the voting public voted for Mitt Romney and the GOP?
StumbleUpon