OPINION: Message To Conservatives: Hold Breitbart Accountable
By Ellen Ratner - Bureau Chief Talk Radio News Service
When I grew up in Cleveland, Ohio, I learned that we had trial by jury and that people were innocent until proven guilty. We watched courtroom dramas where people we thought were guilty from all the available facts were proven innocent when the likes of Perry Mason defended them in court. I thought that due process was something that was a hallowed and cherished principle of our American ideals.
That seems to have gone out the window. On radio I am forever defending the right of people to not be incarcerated in Guantanamo without trail. People tell me I am soft on terrorism. No, I am not; I am just in love with what I was taught about real justice.
So, what am I to think when my fellow liberals caved under pressure when the right wing uses viral Internet videos to make a community organization, ACORN, look like it is renting to obvious pimps or racist government employees? I think we have forgotten what we stand for.
The ACORN video was heavily edited to make ACORN look bad and like a criminal enterprise. Whomever edited the Shirley Sherrod video left out the whole story. Sherrod’s whole story was about her personal transformation to being color blind and being concerned about small farmers. It is a great and heartwarming tale.
Later, we learned that her husband was a famous member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, or SNCC, during the early ’60s. When other African-American members of SNCC did not want to take the time to deal with white kids from the North, Ms. Sherrod’s husband did. There is a family history of working with others to achieve equality.
When online editing first came into being, I used to show our interns how you could take any interview and edit individual words to make the speaker say something they did not. The interns learned a lesson about media manipulation. What we have seen in the ACORN and NAACP tape of Sherrod is an example of that kind of manipulation.
The 24-hour news cycle has pulled more reporters off the beat, increased demand for content and made real investigative journalism almost a thing of the past. Organizations simply can’t the luxury of sitting on a story, mulling over its implications has all but gone. No one news organization can be blamed as everyone one of those news organizations has taken some short cuts in pursuit of getting something on the air. It is just the economic state of the news business.
What I do not understand is why conservatives have not held Andrew Breitbart’s feet to the fire for allowing two edited videotapes on his website? How is it that anyone would ever give something he tries to hawk to destroy perceived liberals any credence? It is actually quite shocking that his fellow conservatives have kept their mouths shut.
ACORN shouldn’t have lost its funding. Shirley Sherrod shouldn’t have been fired, even though she was instantly rehired. Due process and innocence before being declared guilty should be the reaction to the media begging for a quick story.
In the future, the fraddy cat liberal Democrats should remember what we were taught grade school: Time and realinvestigation should take place before they take the bait. It may make the right wing think twice before they surface another fake scandal.
OPINION: Kagan To Bring A 'Center' Court
Elena Kagan was sworn in, and now we have a court that is a bit more to the center.
Kagan is no Justice John Paul Stevens, although my hope is that she will grow into a more liberal justice.
The hearings were as expected, and so was the vote with the more centrist Republicans voting with the Democrats. It went as planned: no huge paper trail, although some on the Right tried to make hay out of some abortion memos she wrote while in the White House counsel’s office.
As Washington D.C. correspondent Victoria Jones said, there was no “Macaca” moment to the Elena Kagan hearings. (Macaca refers to a racial slur by George Allen in his 2006 Senate campaign). What we heard at the hearings was someone who has a very detailed knowledge of the law and who was well prepared from her weeks of practice “murder boards” that took place to prepare her for the grilling.
The hearings and the objections from some of the Republicans were Washington doing what Washington does best: political theater.
During the hearings, Sen. Patrick Leahy, an amateur photographer, was taking pictures. The professional photographers where taking pictures of him.
Kagan was able to breeze past her undergraduate thesis in which she said that justices wield great power for social and economic change when asked by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. Clearly, Kagan knew it was coming and was able to toss the ball out of the park with ease.
She deftly handled the gay marriage issue by saying that is was probably going to come before the court. When Sen. Arlen Specter – with nothing to lose since he already lost – asked her to talk about a current case, she responded that it was something under her as solicitor general. Specter said she was going to be a justice, she responded that she doesn’t count her chickens.
Without a “Macaca” moment, pretty much every senator went into this knowing exactly how they were going to vote. The nominees are now carefully coached on how not to answer questions. It is exasperating to sit and listen to it.
When Sen. Herbert Kohl, D-Wis., asked her about who she admired on the court and got a non-answer, he shook his head and said “Oh my oh, my oh.” A conservative constitutional lawyer said to me that the carping about her was a way of raising money from the base for the 2012 elections while at the same time most of the GOP senators were pretty happy that even though she self-described her political viewpoints as “progressive,” her actual actions and memos were not.
The handouts that were given to the press by each side reflected the complete political nature of this constitutionally mandated “advise and consent” role. There were letters from law school deans praising her for the compromise reached on campus military recruiters.
The Republicans, knowing that the base hates gays in the military, came back with their own set of papers that they hoped would show how anti-military she is. They expected to stir up the base and get more money.
It didn’t work.
The only reason to have these hearings is to make sure that the nominee is not a complete idiot or lunatic and won’t lose their cool. It also is the only chance that the public has to see and feel what a future justice is like. Other than that, it is scripted and a waste of time. The votes were set, and the only role of any future justice is make sure they don’t say anything that is going to nix the nomination.
This charade of hearings will most likely happen again quite soon. Justice Ginsburg had a second cancer operation in 2009, and three other justices are in their ’70s. It will happen again exactly the same way. A president will appoint someone who is political and doesn’t have too long of a paper trail. The candidate will not say anything controversial.
What a waste of time and energy. Too bad we can’t do better. The only thing better staged is a real-estate open house.