1. ABC, CBS and NBC Morning Shows All Hit Obama from Left on Iraq
Barack Obama appeared on the morning shows of all three networks on Wednesday and was repeatedly critiqued from the left on the issue of whether or not he's backing away from his commitment to pull U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months. CBS Early Show co-host Russ Mitchell challenged the Democratic presidential candidate: "What do you say to those folks out there who are saying 'I voted for this guy because he told me he was going to bring the troops home in 16 months now he says he wants to refine his position.'" Over on ABC's Good Morning America, co-host Diane Sawyer pointedly told the candidate that "some of your core supporters" have been sensing "shifting positions and you've gotten quite a drubbing in a couple of fronts." She asked: "You have said previously, we will be out -- we will be out of Iraq in 16 months. Are you now saying it's your goal or that you might refine that or do you still repeat, we will be out in 16 months?" On NBC's Today, Matt Lauer lectured the Illinois Senator that "people" were "nervous" about his backtracking on Iraq and the NBC co-host highlighted a complaint from leftist New York Times columnist Bob Herbert: "Let me read you what Bob Herbert said..."

2. Matthews 'Thrilled' By Obama Surge,Pushes McAuliffe: Get Vote Out
On Wednesday night's Hardball, Chris Matthews seemed "thrilled" by new poll numbers showing Obama gaining strength and was so caught up in Terry McAuliffe's prediction of a Democratic sweep he encouraged the former DNC chair "to get the vote out." First up, on the July 9 edition of Hardball, Matthews made the following introduction to a segment with NBC's Chuck Todd on state by state poll numbers. "Welcome back to Hardball. The NBC News political unit has some brand new battleground maps on the fight for the White House. Let's check in with NBC News political director Chuck Todd. Chuck, dazzle us right now, will ya? Because I'm thrilled with this. Obama's strength in the Northeast, the West Coast and the Great Lakes."

3. NYTimes on VP Picks: Lots of Conservative Labels, No Liberal Ones
While "conservatives" have trouble with Mitt Romney and Tom Ridge and like Sen. John Thune, there are apparently no liberals who have trouble with potential Democratic VP possibilities. Rounding another turn in the race to November 4, the New York Times "Election Guide -- Potential Running Mates," compiled by Adam Nagourney and Jeff Zeleny and posted to nytimes.com on Monday, handicapped various potential vice presidents for Barack Obama and John McCain and analyzing whether they would help or hurt the candidate. The initial filing contained twenty-one names, 11 potential Democrats and 10 potential Republicans (Democratic Sen. Jim Webb's name has since been removed after he took himself out of consideration). The rundown included seven uses of the word "conservative" as a description of either one of the candidates or a group of party supporters, including one "conservative Democrat," former senator Sam Nunn. By contrast, not a single "liberal" was found in a lineup that included John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.

4. Bipartisan Support of New FISA, Nets See 'Controversy' & 'Spying'
Overwhelming bipartisan majorities in the Senate and House agreed to a new Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) the President will happily sign, with the Senate -- including 21 Democrats -- voting for it Wednesday by 69 to 29, yet NBC and ABC painted it as "controversial" based on how the bill blocks lawsuits against telecommunications companies which cooperated with the President after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Though the program tracked communication between suspected terrorists overseas and people within the United States, not all of them Americans, NBC's Brian Williams delivered a more nefarious picture of firms that had "helped to spy on Americans" and ABC's Charles Gibson referred to "the ability to listen in on Americans without a warrant." Williams announced: "The Senate approved controversial new rules allowing the government to listen in on phone calls and read e-mails. And what happened today is controversial in large part because America's telecommunications companies get unprecedented protection from lawsuits if they helped to spy on Americans in effect."

5. CBS's Early Show: High Gas Prices Deadly for Sick and Elderly
On Wednesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Russ Mitchell declared: "The high cost of gas is hurting everyone these days. Families, businesses, and even charities. Many organizations that deliver food to the sick and elderly are being hit extra hard." In the report that followed, correspondent Kelly Wallace went even further: "In one rural California case, according to the president of Meals on Wheels nationwide, cutting back from daily deliveries to one every 14 days proved fatal. Two seniors were found dead." The Meals on Wheels president, Enid Borden, explained: "We have people who are literally dying in their homes waiting for a meal. That's a crisis." Wallace also played a clip of Maryland Meals on Wheels executive director, Tom Grazio, who worried: "Some day in the not too distant future, unless things get better, we'll be telling people they can't eat today and that's disheartening."

ABC, CBS and NBC Morning Shows All Hit
Obama from Left on Iraq

     After Obama attempted to reassure Mitchell that he still supported timetables for Iraq, the CBS anchor pressed for more comforting words: "So that's still the plan, 16 months after you take office?" Over on ABC's Good Morning America, co-host Diane Sawyer pointedly told the candidate that "some of your core supporters" have been sensing "shifting positions and you've gotten quite a drubbing in a couple of fronts." She asked: "This is the question this morning: You have said previously, we will be out -- we will be out of Iraq in 16 months. Are you now saying it's your goal or that you might refine that or do you still repeat, we will be out in 16 months?"

     On NBC's Today show, Matt Lauer lectured the Illinois Senator that "people" were "nervous" about Obama's backtracking on the issue of Iraq, as well as on other subjects. On Iraq, the journalist complained: "And on Iraq when, when throughout the primaries you did talk about this, this idea of getting U.S. troops out within 16 months of being elected and now you say, 'Look I'll talk to commanders and generals on the ground and my, my ideas are being refined.' People do get nervous about that Senator, you understand that?"

     To prove Obama's rightward tilt on not just Iraq, the NBC co-host highlighted a complaint from leftist New York Times columnist Bob Herbert: "Let me read you what Bob Herbert said or wrote in the New York Times, on Tuesday. He said this, quote, 'Senator Obama is not just tacking gently toward the center. He's lurching right when it suits him, he's zigging with the kind of reckless abandon that's guaranteed to cause disillusion, if not whiplash.'"

     When John McCain appeared on GMA on July 2, various hosts and reporters speculated five times that his trip to South America during such tough financial times might indicate a lack of caring about the economic situation of Americans. See a July 3, 2008 CyberAlert posting: www.mrc.org

     During the July 9 segment, however, Sawyer served up softballs for Obama to hit with campaign talking points. Noting that the Democrat will be doing an economic tour with Senator Hillary Clinton on the financial situation of women, Sawyer regurgitated: "One of the items [to be discussed] is to close the pay gap, which is now women earning 78 cents on the dollar for men. And yet it's only been closing for about two cents a year over the past decade. How are you going to close that gap?"
     This CyberAlert item is based on Wednesday afternoon NewsBusters postings by the MRC's Geoffrey Dickens, Kyle Drennen and Scott Whitlock.

     For the NewsBusters post on the Today show, with video: newsbusters.org

     For the Early Show post: newsbusters.org

     For the Good Morning America post: newsbusters.org

Matthews 'Thrilled' By Obama Surge,Pushes
McAuliffe: Get Vote Out

     On Wednesday night's Hardball, Chris Matthews seemed "thrilled" by new poll numbers showing Obama gaining strength and was so caught up in Terry McAuliffe's prediction of a Democratic sweep he encouraged the former DNC chair "to get the vote out."

     [This item, by Geoffrey Dickens, was posted Wednesday evening on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org

     First up, on the July 9 edition of Hardball, Matthews made the following introduction to a segment with NBC's Chuck Todd on state by state poll numbers. "Welcome back to Hardball. The NBC News political unit has some brand new battleground maps on the fight for the White House. Let's check in with NBC News political director Chuck Todd. Chuck, dazzle us right now, will ya? Because I'm thrilled with this. Obama's strength in the Northeast, the West Coast and the Great Lakes."

     Now to be fair Matthews, he could have just been "thrilled" in anticipation of Todd's dazzling poll analysis. However, a little later in the program, Matthews seemed to have gotten caught up in the excitement of former DNC Chair McAuliffe anticipating a big Democratic victory in the fall:

     MATTHEWS: How many senators after this is all over for the Democratic Party? 55? 56?
     TERRY MCAULIFFE: 56, 57 I think. Could actually-
     MATTHEWS: Really? You can pick up Gordon Smith?
     MCAULIFFE: Well look at Mississippi. Ronnie Musgrove is up six, we could do Kentucky with Bruce Lunsford.
     MATTHEWS: Oh that's a real stretch.
     MCAULIFFE: We could win Alaska, we could win Oregon, we could end up winning Minnesota.
     MATTHEWS: Oh that would be 58.
     MCAULIFFE: New Hampshire we've got. We look at Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado. Those four are good.
     MATTHEWS: You got Colorado, you got Colorado. You got New Mexico, you got at least those two. You got, I can see a 55. You think you can get up to 56 or 57?
     MCAULIFFE: We could and here's the important thing as a Democrat. 80 percent of the state legislator seats are up.
     MATTHEWS: Okay.
     MCAULIFFE: They're up. You know what that affects? 2010 redistricting. We gotta stay together. We can win it all!
     MATTHEWS: Why don't you come on here-
     MCAULIFFE: This could be a sweep! Chris this could be all ours!
     MATTHEWS: Alright. You could be, you could be. Come on Election Night, get the vote out. Anyway.
     MCAULIFFE: Thank you.
     MATTHEWS: Terry McAuliffe. Once and future chair of the leader of all party Democrats.

NYTimes on VP Picks: Lots of Conservative
Labels, No Liberal Ones

     While "conservatives" have trouble with Mitt Romney and Tom Ridge and like Sen. John Thune, there are apparently no liberals who have trouble with potential Democratic VP possibilities. Rounding another turn in the race to November 4, the New York Times "Election Guide -- Potential Running Mates," compiled by Adam Nagourney and Jeff Zeleny and posted to nytimes.com on Monday, handicapped various potential vice presidents for Barack Obama and John McCain and analyzing whether they would help or hurt the candidate: politics.nytimes.com

     The initial filing contained twenty-one names, 11 potential Democrats and 10 potential Republicans (Democratic Sen. Jim Webb's name has since been removed after he took himself out of consideration). The rundown included seven uses of the word "conservative" as a description of either one of the candidates or a group of party supporters, including one "conservative Democrat," former senator Sam Nunn.

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

     We learned South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham "has occasionally rankled some conservatives by not being conservative enough," that former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge might not help with "McCain's already uneasy relations with conservatives," and that South Dakota Sen. John Thune "has strong credentials with social conservatives."

     By contrast, not a single "liberal" was found in a lineup that included John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.

     The Times didn't even talk about possible opposition from "liberal" voters to some Democratic picks, although the paper had plenty of opportunity to when discussing controversial Sen. Jim Webb, a blood-and-soil Democrat: "But any vetting process would have to take into account the vast writings of Mr. Webb, a former author, who has penned tales about the Confederacy that are controversial in the eyes of some, as well as his on-the-record comments about women serving in the military."

     As for "conservative Democrat" Sam Nunn: "Mr. Obama would certainly encounter some heat from his supporters if he turned to Mr. Nunn."

     Instead of vague words like "some" or "supporters," why can't the Times simply state the obvious -- that those who would oppose Nunn and Webb are liberals -- in the same manner the paper so freely tosses around the term "conservatives"?

Bipartisan Support of New FISA, Nets
See 'Controversy' & 'Spying'

     Overwhelming bipartisan majorities in the Senate and House agreed to a new Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) the President will happily sign, with the Senate -- including 21 Democrats -- voting for it Wednesday by 69 to 29, yet NBC and ABC painted it as "controversial" based on how the bill blocks lawsuits against telecommunications companies which cooperated with the President after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Though the program tracked communication between suspected terrorists overseas and people within the United States, not all of them Americans, NBC's Brian Williams delivered a more nefarious picture of firms that had "helped to spy on Americans" and ABC's Charles Gibson referred to "the ability to listen in on Americans without a warrant."

     Williams announced: "The Senate approved controversial new rules allowing the government to listen in on phone calls and read e-mails. And what happened today is controversial in large part because America's telecommunications companies get unprecedented protection from lawsuits if they helped to spy on Americans in effect."

     Gibson asserted: "One of the most controversial aspects of the bill will protect telecommunications companies from lawsuits for giving the government the ability to listen in on Americans without a warrant."

     On NBC, reporter Pete Williams fretted: "This dooms more than three dozen lawsuits against telephone companies and e-mail providers over what they did to help the government intercept communications after 9/11. So this means that no court can now be asked to rule on whether the Bush administration's eavesdropping program was ever constitutional."

     Only Pete Williams, however, noted the foreign requirement to the monitoring: "Now the government gets authority to spy on terror suspects overseas even if they are talking to people in the U.S. and it can do that without a court order."

     In June, the bill passed the Democratic House by 293 to 129.

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

     The AP dispatch, "Senate bows to Bush, approves surveillance bill," portrayed the Senate as bullied into the bill by President Bush. The lead from Washington bureau reporter Pamela Hess cited Bush's "demands" and how the telecommunication companies "helped the U.S. spy on Americans.":
     "Bowing to President Bush's demands, the Senate approved and sent the White House a bill Wednesday to overhaul bitterly disputed rules on secret government eavesdropping and shield telecommunications companies from lawsuits complaining they helped the U.S. spy on Americans."

     See: news.yahoo.com

     By comparison, the WashingtonPost.com story carried a more straight-forward headline: "Senate Passes Surveillance Bill With Immunity for Telecom Firms." See: www.washingtonpost.com

     The New York Times article: "Senate Backs Wiretap Bill to Shield Phone Companies." See: www.nytimes.com

     ABC and CBS limited coverage to short items read by their anchors.

     ABC's Charles Gibson, on the Wednesday, July 9 World News: "In Washington, the Senate has passed a bill which will overhaul the rules on the government's spying powers. The vote was 69-28. One of the most controversial aspects of the bill will protect telecommunications companies from lawsuits for giving the government the ability to listen in on Americans without a warrant. President Bush has been pushing hard for this bill for months."

     # On the CBS Evening News, Katie Couric got to FISA after a look at Ted Kennedy's return to the Senate following his brain cancer diagnosis: "Coming up, the lion of the Senate hears the roar of the crowd." Couric's short update: "Also in the Senate today, final congressional approval for an extension of terrorist surveillance rules, including warrant-less wiretaps. President Bush says the law will help track terrorist activity, but opponents say it threatens the privacy of U.S. citizens. The law also shields phone companies that participate in the program from lawsuits."

     # NBC Nightly News:

     BRIAN WILLIAMS: In Washington today, the Senate approved controversial new rules allowing the government to listen in on phone calls and read e-mails. And what happened today is controversial in large part because America's telecommunications companies get unprecedented protection from lawsuits if they helped to spy on Americans in effect. Our justice correspondent Pete Williams has more tonight from our Washington bureau. And Pete, for those who haven't kept up on this story, what's it all about?
     PETE WILLIAMS: Well, it's all about the administration getting basically what it wanted and by a wide margin today, 69 to28. This dooms more than three dozen lawsuits against telephone companies and e-mail providers over what they did to help the government intercept communications after 9/11. So this means that no court can now be asked to rule on whether the Bush administration's eavesdropping program was ever constitutional. Now the government gets authority to spy on terror suspects overseas even if they are talking to people in the U.S. and it can do that without a court order, but auditors will monitor whether that authority is being improperly used to target Americans indirectly. The government will also have to get approval for its surveillance plans from a federal court and the bill adds a new requirement: no eavesdropping on Americans overseas without a court order, Brian.
     BRIAN WILLIAMS: All right, Pete Williams in our Washington newsroom tonight, thanks.

CBS's Early Show: High Gas Prices Deadly
for Sick and Elderly

     On Wednesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Russ Mitchell declared: "The high cost of gas is hurting everyone these days. Families, businesses, and even charities. Many organizations that deliver food to the sick and elderly are being hit extra hard." In the report that followed, correspondent Kelly Wallace went even further: "In one rural California case, according to the president of Meals on Wheels nationwide, cutting back from daily deliveries to one every 14 days proved fatal. Two seniors were found dead." The Meals on Wheels president, Enid Borden, explained: "We have people who are literally dying in their homes waiting for a meal. That's a crisis." Wallace also played a clip of Maryland Meals on Wheels executive director, Tom Grazio, who worried: "Some day in the not too distant future, unless things get better, we'll be telling people they can't eat today and that's disheartening."

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

     Wallace then described "a dire situation in New York City," where Meals on Wheels director Marcia Stein continued the melodramatic theme: "For the first time in our 25-year history, we are having to ration food. We're having to make tough choices about who gets a meal, who does not get a meal, what days somebody might be without food." From this report, one is under the impression that people are literally starving to death across the country due to high gas prices. In May, the Early Show described how one woman "...pumps out her own blood, making $40 a pop so she has enough money to pump gas." See the May 29 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org

     Here is the full transcript of the story from the 8am half hour of the July 9 early Show:

     RUSS MITCHELL: The high cost of gas is hurting everyone these days. Families, businesses, and even charities. Many organizations that deliver food to the sick and elderly are being hit extra hard. CBS News correspondent Kelly Wallace reports.

     UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Meals on Wheels, Ruth.
     WALLACE: In Baltimore, where Meals on Wheels delivers 3,500 meals every weekday to the elderly, the program's director is almost out of options. You're worried. Is that what I'm picking up? I mean-
     TOM GRAZIO: Yeah, I am worried. Who wouldn't be.
     WALLACE: With his food costs up 16%, his gas costs doubling, and no more fat to trim from the staff, Grazio may have to do the unthinkable.
     GRAZIO: Some day in the not too distant future, unless things get better, we'll be telling people they can't eat today and that's disheartening.
     WALLACE: According to a recent survey of Meals on Wheels programs around the country, 58% have lost volunteers due to rising gas prices. 38% have had to turn needy clients away. And nearly a third have cut back on the frequency of deliveries. In one rural California case, according to the president of Meals on Wheels nationwide, cutting back from daily deliveries to one every 14 days proved fatal. Two seniors were found dead.
     ENID BORDEN: We have people who are literally dying in their homes waiting for a meal. That's a crisis.
     WALLACE: It's a dire situation in New York City, too, where the city-run Meals on Wheels program faces higher food costs. As much as 60% higher for staples like orange juice.
     UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN B: This is juice for both today and tomorrow.
     MARCIA STEIN: For the first time in our 25-year history, we are having to ration food. We're having to make tough choices about who gets a meal, who does not get a meal, what days somebody might be without food.
     WALLACE: At God's Love We Deliver, which provides nutritious meals to the sick, in order to counter soaring food costs and ensure no one is turned away, they've had to change the way they shop.
     KAREN PEARL: We just ordered 200 bags of rice. Don't ask me where we're going to store it, but 200 bags of rice because we found out that they're going up another $5 a bag.
     WALLACE: Back in Baltimore, volunteer Joanne Lang says no matter how high gas prices climb, she'll still make her rounds.
     JOANNE LANG: I can't imagine saying, 'sorry, I don't have the money for gas.' I just couldn't do that.
     WALLACE: 93 1/2-year-old Ruth Gore is grateful.
     RUTH GORE: Without Meals on Wheels, I couldn't be here by myself.
     WALLACE: Kelly Wallace, CBS News, Baltimore.
     GORE: Thank you for all your help.
     MITCHELL: Non-profits are now pushing Congress to give a bigger tax deduction to those who drive their own vehicles for charities. It could be one small way to help a growing problem.

-- Brent Baker