1. ABC Regrets California's 'Unwillingness to Raise Taxes'
A Tuesday story on ABC's World News, which ignored soaring state spending, reflected frustration with California voters for the anticipated rejection of ballot initiatives to raise taxes as reporter Laura Marquez blamed the Golden State's budget deficit on an "unwillingness to raise taxes" stretching all the way back to 1978's Proposition 13. In fact, though personal income tax collections "dropped 14% last year," a Tuesday Wall Street Journal article noted they "soared 70% from 2002 to 2007."

2. Sanchez and Slater Agree Bush 'Presided Over a Reign of Bullies'
CNN anchor Rick Sanchez and Dallas Morning News political writer Wayne Slater agreed on Tuesday's Newsroom program that former President George W. Bush appeared to be "controlled by a bunch of bullies," or that he was "presiding over a reign of bullies, with [Dick] Cheney and [Donald] Rumsfeld and Karl Rove pushing a partisan agenda." Later, as President Obama was getting ready to speak at a meeting with small business owners, Slater sought to correct the conservative critics of the administration's economic policy: "You have the right wing pounding on him day after day for the...bail-outs...a liberal, a socialist -- and yet, here you have a guy who really is tracking a fairly moderate line."

3. NBC's Mitchell Touts Liberal 'Good Republican' Chris Shays on GOP
Who did MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell feature to respond to RNC Chairman Michael Steele's Tuesday speech about the future of the Republican Party? Chris Shays, the liberal, former Republican Congressman with a lifetime American Conservative Union score of 44, appeared on Andrea Mitchell Reports to critique the chairman of the Republican National Committee. After Shays insisted that Dick Cheney shouldn't be deciding who is and isn't a solid member of the GOP, Mitchell complimented: "Chris Shays, a good Republican." Responding to the Steele speech, Mitchell pontificated, "No mention of Dick Cheney. No mention of Rush Limbaugh. Is he [Steele] trying to move the party to a broader party, one that would include you? You were the last standing moderate from the northeast."

4. ABC's Diane Sawyer Pleads for European-Style Gas Tax
Good Morning America co-host Diane Sawyer on Tuesday aggressively lobbied for the Obama administration to install a European-style gas tax on the United States. Talking to Carol Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, about Obama's plans for increased fuel standards, she began: "Why not just go to a gas tax, for instance, which would accomplish a reduction in the use of gasoline, dependence on foreign oil right away?" Sawyer would proceed to ask variations on this question six times. Citing calls for a gas tax by New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, she pressed: "If you really want to change the fuel patterns of this country, and if you want to reduce dependence on foreign oil, not by 2015 or 2016, but right now, there is one way to do it. It's the way Europe has been doing it. And that is a gasoline tax."

5. PBS's Tavis Smiley in Time: 'Capitalism is Like a Child'
Time magazine is not wild about capitalism. In a "business roundtable" on the "future of capitalism," Time assembled several liberals to decry the idea: PBS host Tavis Smiley, blog founder Arianna Huffington, and soul singer John Legend all found the need for capitalism to have a large dose of government intervention. Smiley was frankest: "I don't think that left to its own devices, capitalism moves along smoothly and everyone gets treated fairly in the process. Capitalism is like a child: if you want the child to grow up free and productive, somebody's got to look over the shoulder of that child."

6. Today Show Crew 'Dazzled' by Michelle Obama's Night Out at the Met
NBC's Matt Lauer and Al Roker, on Tuesday's Today show, revealed they enjoyed a "nice" evening at the theater the night before, in the presence of Michelle Obama, as she "dazzled New York City for a second time," when she visited the Metropolitan Opera House. After an Amy Robach piece that celebrated Mrs. Obama's return to the Big Apple, Roker and Lauer bragged that they too were in attendance at the American Ballet Theater Spring Gala, along with the First Lady, as Roker gushed: "It was fantastic!"

ABC Regrets California's 'Unwillingness
to Raise Taxes'

     A Tuesday story on ABC's World News, which ignored soaring state spending, reflected frustration with California voters for the anticipated rejection of ballot initiatives to raise taxes as reporter Laura Marquez blamed the Golden State's budget deficit on an "unwillingness to raise taxes" stretching all the way back to 1978's Proposition 13. In fact, though personal income tax collections "dropped 14% last year," a Tuesday Wall Street Journal article noted they "soared 70% from 2002 to 2007." See: "Schwarzenegger Puts Legacy on the Line With Budget Vote," at: online.wsj.com

     In the story pegged to Tuesday's vote on a series of initiatives to raise or extend an income-tax surcharge, a big hike in the car tax and one point sales tax jump to 9 percent, Marquez fretted that "polls show five of six initiatives aimed at reducing the budget gap are likely to be voted down," leading Schwarzenegger, Marquez relayed, to warn "the defeat of these measures will mean billions of dollars in cuts to social services and education, and will force thousands of layoffs from the state rolls." From San Francisco, Marquez rued:
     "Coast to coast, state governments are swimming in red ink, overwhelmed by the tanking economy. Here in California, the problem is even worse because of its sheer size and an unwillingness to raise taxes. Thirty years ago, Californians passed Proposition 13, mandating an almost unachievable two-thirds vote by the legislature to raise taxes."

     Viewers then heard from a UC-Berkeley professor who complained about the impediments to raising taxes: "California preferences for spending are we want lots of things, we want it all, but we've put in place a decision-making system that prevents us from raising the revenue to pay for that."

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

     Columnist George Will, a regular on ABC's own This Week, pointed out in a May 3 column what Marquez omitted -- that the state government has hardly been starving for money: "If, since 1990, state spending increases had been held to the inflation rate plus population growth, the state would have a $15 billion surplus instead of a $42 billion budget deficit." In addition, in Arnold "Schwarzenegger's less than six years as Governor, per capita government spending, adjusted for inflation, has increased nearly 20 percent." For Will's "No More California Dreaming," go to: www.washingtonpost.com

     The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the story on the Tuesday, May 19 edition of ABC's World News:

     CHARLES GIBSON: In California today, voters went to the polls for the twelfth time in just seven years to vote on proposals to make up a budget deficit that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has estimated could grow to $21 billion. The government has warned of dire consequences if the proposals fail, and it appears they will fail. Here's Laura Marquez.

     LAURA MARQUEZ: If Californians once lived the epitome of the American dream, they now find themselves in the midst of a budget nightmare. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the legislature are looking to voters to fix it, and the voters are blaming lawmakers.
     NOEL RAGSDALE, CALIFORNIA VOTER: They should, you know, take responsibility for their votes instead of dumping it off onto the voters.
     MARQUEZ: Polls show five of six initiatives aimed at reducing the budget gap are likely to be voted down. The exception? One that denies raises to lawmakers in deficit years. The governor warns the defeat of these measures will mean billions of dollars in cuts to social services and education, and will force thousands of layoffs from the state rolls.
     ELIZABETH LEWIS, TEACHER: I'm worried about, am I going to be able to pay my bills next year?
     MARQUEZ: Coast to coast, state governments are swimming in red ink, overwhelmed by the tanking economy. Here in California, the problem is even worse because of its sheer size and an unwillingness to raise taxes. Thirty years ago, Californians passed Proposition 13, mandating an almost unachievable two-thirds vote by the legislature to raise taxes.
     PROFESSOR JOHN ELLWOOD, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-BERKELEY: California preferences for spending are we want lots of things, we want it all, but we've put in place a decision-making system that prevents us from raising the revenue to pay for that.
     ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER IN CLIP FROM TERMINATOR: I'll be back.
     SCHWARZENEGGER SPEAKING AT A GRADUATION CEREMONY: I'll be back.
     MARQUEZ: A system so entrenched it seems to have rendered the action hero turned governor powerless.
     PHIL BRONSTEIN, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE: What he brought to Sacramento was this power of celebrity. And I think he was counting on that to bend the molecules in the state house.
     MARQUEZ: Even if voters were to pass the governor's slate of budget propositions, California will still be $15 billion in the hole. Laura Marquez, ABC News, San Francisco.

Sanchez and Slater Agree Bush 'Presided
Over a Reign of Bullies'

     CNN anchor Rick Sanchez and Dallas Morning News political writer Wayne Slater agreed on Tuesday's Newsroom program that former President George W. Bush appeared to be "controlled by a bunch of bullies," or that he was "presiding over a reign of bullies, with [Dick] Cheney and [Donald] Rumsfeld and Karl Rove pushing a partisan agenda." Later, as President Obama was getting ready to speak at a meeting with small business owners, Slater sought to correct the conservative critics of the administration's economic policy: "You have the right wing pounding on him day after day for the...bail-outs...a liberal, a socialist -- and yet, here you have a guy who really is tracking a fairly moderate line."

     Sanchez first had the Dallas Morning News writer on just after the bottom half of 3 pm Eastern hour of the CNN program to discuss a recent article in GQ magazine which alleged that former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "held up military aid to New Orleans in the days after Hurricane Katrina." The CNN anchor first asked, "Why would Donald Rumsfeld not want to help the people of New Orleans in this situation, given that he had his finger on the military relief?"

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

     Slater toed the standard liberal line on Rumsfeld: "Well, that was the point. He had his finger on the military relief and wanted to keep it. This was a turf battle. It's interesting that Rumsfeld -- I think nobody doubts reflected an attitude of certitude maybe, arrogance. This caused problems overseas, and now we find out that sort of attitude about things caused problems here at home." He continued that he thought that the former defense chief "wasn't thinking in terms of hurting people. I'm sure of that. What he was thinking about was protecting his own turf and interpreting everything as a challenge."

     After excerpting some alleged quotes by President Bush from the GQ story, Sanchez wondered if these allegations or leaks were "part of the legacy building for the president." Slater agreed: "That's what this is, Rick. This is legacy building time. The administration's out -- folks on different parts of administration are pointing fingers, trying to make somebody else look bad, so that they look good." Sanchez replied, "But it doesn't make him look good. It makes him look like a guy who was being controlled by a bunch of bullies."

     The political writer wholeheartedly agreed: "That's exactly it. If Lincoln had a sort of team of rivals, it now appears that Bush was presiding over a reign of bullies, with Cheney and Rumsfeld and Karl Rove pushing a partisan agenda. And so by comparison, you're right. Bush seems a bit weak, but by some comparison, he certainly looks better than these guys, and I think that's part of the legacy-building effort by the leakers for this [GQ] piece."

     Both Sanchez and Slater continued with this "legacy building" subject, and the anchor brought in the seemingly obligatory Abu Ghraib matter:

     SANCHEZ: You wrote the book on these guys. I mean, who's back there pulling the strings? Who's in the back room saying, you know what? Here's the way we want the legacy to go. It didn't go all well for this guy -- for our president. However, [it] wasn't all his fault. It was a bunch of guys around him who were pulling his strings.
     SLATER: Well, I think -- I think with respect to this piece, and other things that have been written, the number one person is Karl Rove. He's the big legacy builder. But there are others. There are others in the administration who weren't very happy about Donald Rumsfeld -- others who aren't that excited about Dick Cheney -- folks who really believe that George Bush was not well treated, was not well served by some of the people around him. And although he left office with one of the lowest approval ratings of any president, by comparison, this legacy building process might lift him a bit so that people will think, well, he is not as bad as those other guys.
     SANCHEZ: He's not so bad -- he was a good guy after all. You know what's interesting about this -- I'm going to tie these two stories now. One -- you and I had a conversation about this, and the folks at home probably remember -- the story about Abu Ghraib and why it is that Lindsey [sic] England and some of these other people went to prisons, while, you know, the vice president and the secretary of defense did not, and now, we hear that they may have been responsible. Well, same situation here -- there was [sic] so many people who were criticized after Katrina -- the mayor, the city council, the governor, the president. Now, again, we start hearing, look who really was, in many ways, at fault. There's starting to be a pattern here, isn't there?
     SLATER: Absolutely a pattern -- you saw it in Abu Ghraib. After Katrina, we saw congressional investigations. They sent it high level -- inquiry, which really at the end didn't do much except to say Brownie -- Michael Brown, and as you said, the mayor and the governor of Louisiana were -- contributed to the problem. But you never saw this stuff about Rumsfeld. You never really saw the people at the top. It was people lower down who took the fall -- exactly what happened at Abu Ghraib, where there was an investigation -- and that's not to say that the people who were -- who got caught up in it were guiltless. But it is that it's amazing how the people at the top always seem to escape responsibility and blame.
     SANCHEZ: And not just the people at the top but the same people.
     SLATER: Same people.

     Minutes later, the CNN anchor brought back Slater just before President Obama spoke to a group of small business owners, and immediately afterwards. This, as you might expect, brought in the debate over whether the Democrat's policies were socialistic. Slater disagreed with this line of criticism, and instead used his "fairly moderate line" label.

     SANCHEZ: Wayne, how important is it for this president to come off as a business-minded president, as opposed to much of the criticism that he's getting from the right, saying that he's a socialist?
     SLATER: I think -- I think it's real important for that perfect reason. You have the right wing pounding on him day after day for the -- for bail-outs, and as I said -- a liberal, a socialist -- and yet, here you have a guy who really is tracking a fairly moderate line, and what you see, for example, today, with respect to the emissions standards, this is a case where he has brought together labor and the auto industry in a way that the previous administrations could not do, to do something -- do something really dramatic.
     SANCHEZ: So if you're a Republican and you really want that socialist banner to stick, what do you go for here? Do you talk about the fact that he's spending so darn much money of -- so much of our money?
     SLATER: Well, you do two things. You talk about -- you continue to talk about the bailouts. You talk about those until they start to work, and if that happens, then you don't talk about them anymore. And that will be a while before we really know. The other thing you talk about is anything that suggests tax increase, anything to suggests government intervention --
     SANCHEZ: Right.
     SLATER: Reinforces that, and in this case, this is a government plan with respect to gas emissions -- gasoline emissions on automobiles. But as you criticize that, as the government's stepping in and mandating certain standards -- when, in fact, what it really is is something the industry wants, and that's instead of having a patchwork of standards -- California has one thing, other states have others -- but the federal government established a uniform standard, and so it's really quite remarkable that he's working at the behest both of the industry -- and I say -- and labor, at a time that it's going to be very difficult for Republican critics to criticize him.

     # 3:52 pm:

     SANCHEZ: As we watch the president now shaking hands with the winner of this year's small business award, and the small business administrator, we can't help but mention, Wayne Slater, if you're still there listening, that these are the very people that the right will say will be overburdened and overtaxed by the Obama economic plan.
     SLATER: That's exactly what the right is going to say. That's what they are already saying, and that's really the subtext of this announcement today. It is that I, Barack Obama and this administration -- we are not the enemy of small business. We are the friend of small business. We are not a socialist operation. We really understand that having been given an economic conflagration, that we understand that small business really does produce the jobs that we need, and I'm going to do something about it. Now that's what you talk about today. We'll see what they actually do in the future.
     SANCHEZ: Yeah, yeah. The jury is still out on this one -- I think a lot of people on both sides would argue.

NBC's Mitchell Touts Liberal 'Good Republican'
Chris Shays on GOP

     Who did MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell feature to respond to RNC Chairman Michael Steele's Tuesday speech about the future of the Republican Party? Chris Shays, the liberal, former Republican Congressman with a lifetime American Conservative Union score of 44, appeared on Andrea Mitchell Reports to critique the chairman of the Republican National Committee. See Shays' ACU score: www.acuratings.org

     After Shays insisted that Dick Cheney shouldn't be deciding who is and isn't a solid member of the GOP, Mitchell complimented: "Chris Shays, a good Republican." Responding to the Steele speech, Mitchell pontificated, "No mention of Dick Cheney. No mention of Rush Limbaugh. Is he [Steele] trying to move the party to a broader party, one that would include you? You were the last standing moderate from the northeast."

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

     Despite Shays' status as a "good Republican," Mitchell became combative when the former representative insisted that Obama's failure to work with Republicans means this is the "President's economy." "Is that fair," she queried.

     After Shays replied in the affirmative, Mitchell retorted, "Well, he [Obama] owns it because, perhaps, not a single one of them [Republicans] voted for his plan." Regarding the general status of the party, Mitchell failed to consider the possibility that the problem wasn't with the Republican Party being too conservative, but with it not living up to conservative ideals.

     A transcript of the May 19 segment, which aired at 1:36pm EDT, follows:
    
     ANDREA MITCHELL: Let's go to Chris Shays, a former Republican congressman. Chris, you were defeated in the last round.
     FMR. REP CHRIS SHAYS (R-Connecticut): Oh, don't say that.
     MITCHELL: No, I say it to set up the fact of, when you listen to a speech like this, and he talked about Edmond Burke. He talked about William F. Buckley, about Ronald Reagan. He mentioned former President Bush, former President Bush. No mention of Dick Cheney. No mention of Rush Limbaugh. Is he trying to move the party to a broader party, one that would include you? You were the last standing moderate from the northeast.
     SHAYS: He should be doing that and-
     MITCHELL: Do you think he was in this speech?
     SHAYS: I think he was. I mean, bottom line, Ronald Reagan never said who could be a Republican. But, we have talk show hosts who have never won elections who define very narrowly who's a Republican. The bottom line of any national party is, it has to give you the capability to represent your district. And if it doesn't allow you to represent your district, you get defeated. And that's what has happened all throughout the northeast and other parts of the country.
     MITCHELL: Now, one of the most striking things about this speech by Michael Steele was that he was making this Barack Obama's economy. Here he is saying that the Republican Party is the party of fiscal conservatism, of small government, yet what Barack Obama inherited in terms of the economy was something that no one could have foreseen. No Obama administration transition official foresaw where we were going with the economy.
     SHAYS: It becomes the President's economy.
     MITCHELL: Is that fair?
     SHAYS: It becomes his economy when he doesn't include Republicans. He invites people to the White House, he dialogues with them, but I'm told by all my colleagues in the House and the Senate that they don't have input. The moment he has input, then it will be ours collectively. But if he didn't allow input, he owns it.
     MITCHELL: Well, he owns it because, perhaps, not a single one of them voted for his plan.
     SHAYS: Yeah, but it was his plan. That's the whole point. If he's talking about reaching out, it means compromise.
     MITCHELL: So, you mean by the virtue of having gone along with Nancy Pelosi's House caucus version of the stimulus package --
     SHAYS: Totally shutting out Republicans, then they own it.
     MITCHELL: Again, when we talks about the size of government, the 6.1 percent decline in GDP and all of the rest of the bad economic indicators, the unemployment numbers. These are indicators and figures that are developed over months, a six-month period. So, is it entirely fair to lay it at the feet of Barack Obama?
     SHAYS: Is it entirely fair, no, but he's the Republican chairman and he's going to state a very strong case. The key will be, will he defeat Republicans who are being criticized by the talk show hosts and say, we need you? Newt Gingrich never said who couldn't be a Republican. Ronald Reagan said who couldn't be a Republican. They both tried to win you over by ideas.
     MITCHELL: When we talk about ideas, what new idea did you hear in Michael Steele's speech about the Republican Party?
     SHAYS: I didn't hear any new ideas. But that's the point. I mean, we need to be talking about ideas. We got off ideas when we started to go after President Clinton for impeachment. And then it began to be, we're going to be a majority for the next 25 years. Our ideas went out the window and it was get rid of Bill Clinton, impeach him. And that was sad. We got out of ideas when we started focusing on Terry Schiavo. I say, we, when the leadership did. I mean, Terry Schiavo, we took out of a state court and brought it into a federal court. Totally contrary to our ideas. President Bush got away immediately when he supported a huge farm bill that even President Clinton wouldn't support and he did the steel quotas. Those were huge mistakes in the past administration. So it would be good to get back to the ideas that got us elected in '94.
     MITCHELL: And briefly on the whole question of whether Dick Cheney or Colin Powell are the Republicans that you would like to define the party?
     SHAYS: Well, first off, I would never say that Colin Powell wasn't a good Republican. He's been a good Republican for a long time. He supported someone who wasn't a Republican. I understand Dick Cheney wanting to defend himself. And that part is fine, but he shouldn't be defining who's a good Republican and who isn't.
     MITCHELL: Chris Shays, a good Republican.
     SHAYS: We're all different. We've got to include a large enough umbrella.

ABC's Diane Sawyer Pleads for European-Style
Gas Tax

     Good Morning America co-host Diane Sawyer on Tuesday aggressively lobbied for the Obama administration to install a European-style gas tax on the United States. Talking to Carol Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, about Obama's plans for increased fuel standards, she began: "Why not just go to a gas tax, for instance, which would accomplish a reduction in the use of gasoline, dependence on foreign oil right away?" Sawyer would proceed to ask variations on this question six times.

     Citing calls for a gas tax by New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, she pressed: "If you really want to change the fuel patterns of this country, and if you want to reduce dependence on foreign oil, not by 2015 or 2016, but right now, there is one way to do it. It's the way Europe has been doing it. And that is a gasoline tax." Browner mostly dodged the question and focused on new fuel and environmental standards. Sawyer, however, would not be deterred. She fretted, "Do you think the gas tax approach is right or wrong? Or just politically unacceptable?" Not liking the non-answers, the ABC host argued, "So, no gas tax ever, as far as you're concerned?"

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

     It soon became clear this would be the focus of almost the entire interview. Sawyer grilled, "I have a feeling we're in a standoff on this question here. It's that politically explosive?" After asking one question on another topic, the anchor returned to her quest for higher taxes. She queried, "I'm asking one more time here. If a gas tax reduces dependence on foreign oil and changes the foreign political dependency immediately, why not be for it right now?"

     Now, at no time did Sawyer speculate or consider the consequences of raising taxes in a recession. She didn't wonder what effect higher taxes have had on Europe. Instead, she repeatedly pushed the Obama administration to the left, practically begging for higher taxes.

     A transcript of the segment, which aired at 7:04am EDT on May 19, follows:

     DIANE SAWYER: Other questions arising this morning. Why not just go to a gas tax, for instance, which would accomplish a reduction in the use of gasoline, dependence on foreign oil right away? One of the questions we posed just a few minutes ago when we talked to Carol Browner, who is the Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change. Ms. Browner, so good to have you with us this morning. Good morning.
     CAROL BROWNER (Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change): Thank you. SAWYER: First, let me just ask this one. It's counterintuitive- the time when the car companies seem to be teetering so badly, to be saying to them, okay, retool for some $40 billion or more?
     BROWNER: Well, Diane, we worked with all of the car companies and ten of the CEOs will be joining the President here today at the White House. And what they told us over and over again is they wanted to make more fuel-efficient. They wanted to make more cleaner cars. And what they needed was the government to give them the predictability and certainty so that they could make the investments towards cleaner cars. And that's what the President announces today.
     SAWYER: Again, I guess they want the government to ensure that everybody is going to be doing this at once. But let me ask you about what Tom Friedman, the columnist from the New York Times, and others have been saying. If you really want to change the fuel patterns of this country, and if you want to reduce dependence on foreign oil, not by 2015 or 2016, but right now, there is one way to do it. It's the way Europe has been doing it. And that is a gasoline tax. And he said you can phase it in over two years, 10 cents a month. It will not be that onerous. And Americans stand ready.
     BROWNER: Well, what we're doing is we're using the laws on the books today, which allow us to set fuel efficiency standards and we're setting the first ever greenhouse gas pollution standards. And what this means is, we're going to be able to reduce our dependence on oil by 1.8 billion barrels over the life of the program.
     SAWYER: Do you think the gas tax approach is right or wrong? Or just politically unacceptable?
     BROWNER: I think what we're doing today is right. I think putting these standards, proposing these standards, moving forward, working with car companies, working in partnership is what we need to be doing.
     SAWYER: So, no gas tax ever, as far as you're concerned?
     BROWNER: We're doing what we think the right today, which is setting fuel efficiency, greenhouse standards.
     SAWYER: I have a feeling we're in a standoff on this question here. It's that politically explosive?
     BROWNER: Well, we work, obviously, within the laws on the books. And what we're using is the President's executive authority to propose these standards. And it is the first-ever time that EPA And DOT Have taken their existing individual authorities and woven them together so that we can give the American public and the car companies what they want.
     SAWYER: Let me just ask one more question here. As we know for cars, you're talking about reduction from 27.5 miles a gallon, up to 39 miles per gallon. Also, light trucks. 23 up to 30. But what about Hummers, which are getting about eight to ten miles a gallon? What are you going to do about them?
     BROWNER: Well, all cars and light-duty trucks are included. So, Hummers would be included. And in every, single category they have to improve their fuel efficiency. This isn't simply about looking across the fleet, and so, therefore, if you make a big car, you got to make smaller cars. This is about every single category of vehicles becoming more fuel-efficient and reducing their greenhouse gas pollution.
     SAWYER: I'm asking one more time here. If a gas tax reduces dependence on foreign oil and changes the foreign political dependency immediately, why not be for it right now?
     BROWNER: Well, what the President is announcing today, these proposed national standards will achieve the greatest reduction in oil use that we've seen in a very, very long time. 1.8 billion barrels of oil will be reduced over the life of the program.
     SAWYER: Again, we thank you so much, Ms. Browner. As we said, it's a big day at the White House, a big announcement. And we're grateful to you for joining us.
     BROWNER: Thank you.

PBS's Tavis Smiley in Time: 'Capitalism
is Like a Child'

     Time magazine is not wild about capitalism. In a "business roundtable" on the "future of capitalism," Time assembled several liberals to decry the idea: PBS host Tavis Smiley, blog founder Arianna Huffington, and soul singer John Legend all found the need for capitalism to have a large dose of government intervention. Smiley was frankest: "I don't think that left to its own devices, capitalism moves along smoothly and everyone gets treated fairly in the process. Capitalism is like a child: if you want the child to grow up free and productive, somebody's got to look over the shoulder of that child."

     [MRC's Tim Graham posted this blog post Tuesday at NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org]

     Time described its roundtable as a symposium on economic evolution: "With our economic world changing so rapidly, many writers and thinkers are looking at the roots of capitalism and how it must evolve. In the first of our series of Time 100 roundtables, we gathered a stellar cast of honorees to ponder the road ahead."
     None of them came to assert that economic liberty was a great value. Arianna Huffington offered the familiar Greed Isn't Good attack: "It was clear among many of the founders of capitalism that there had to be a moral foundation. What happened is that capitalism was reduced to Ayn Rand-ian selfishness. We need to recapture the principle that you do well, but in the process of doing well, you give back."

     Huffington also attacked the idea of a bailout: "What is fascinating is the agreement among serious economists that we're doing the wrong thing by trying to protect the Wall Street oligarchy. What's amazing is that we're not having enough of a populist outrage about that."

     David Sheff, author of an "addiction memoir," not only unsurprisingly came out for "decriminalizing marijuana," he lauded the chance we have "to break apart our health-care system in ways it needs to be broken apart. Here's an opportunity to rethink the whole thing."

     The closest thing to a defender of capitalism was Stephan Schuster, a molecular biologist, who simply failed to denounce it. He offered this pedestrian thought: "The system as a whole is still working. But for capitalism to have a future, it needs to survive. What are the regulatory mechanisms that will ensure that in 100 years -- in 500 years -- there is still a system"?

     Singer John Legend also loaded up a cliche: "I believe there is a role for the government to play in evening the playing field and investing in development. We need to invest in the future and invest in the global good. Capitalism is not just a free-for-all, every man for himself."

     Is this really the best Time can do, the best "stellar cast" of "writers and thinkers" that the magazine can assemble? It's certainly not a balanced cast in any political way.

     Time's "Future of Capitalism" section: www.time.com

Today Show Crew 'Dazzled' by Michelle
Obama's Night Out at the Met

     NBC's Matt Lauer and Al Roker, on Tuesday's Today show, revealed they enjoyed a "nice" evening at the theater the night before, in the presence of Michelle Obama, as she "dazzled New York City for a second time," when she visited the Metropolitan Opera House. After an Amy Robach piece that celebrated Mrs. Obama's return to the Big Apple, Roker and Lauer bragged that they too were in attendance at the American Ballet Theater Spring Gala, along with the First Lady, as Roker gushed: "It was fantastic!"

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

     For her part Robach joined in the Obama family myth-making as she cheered, "Everyone takes notice when the First Lady is out on the town here in the Big Apple and Monday was no exception." Robach, in her piece, even included several soundbites from a delighted New York Times' Jodi Kantor who enthused: "You look at the kind of parties that the Met hosts and if you look at the top ballet galas in New York they always have big celebrities there, but Mrs. Obama is a different order of magnitude."

     Kantor later made the inevitable Camelot comparison, "Mrs. Obama is in some ways a very traditional First Lady. Jackie Kennedy Onassis was a great champion of the American Ballet Theater and her visits not only show that she wants people to support these organizations but she's also adding a big dose of presidential glamour."

     Robach also highlighted how the New York Times wasn't the only print publication enthralled by Mrs. Obama as "Today's" national correspondent pointed out the First Lady made both Time and Maxim's Top 100 lists, to which Kantor cooed: "I think it shows how broad her appeal is right now."

     The following Lauer opening teaser, Robach story, and Lauer and Roker exchanges with Vieira were aired on the May 19 Today show:

     MATT LAUER: Also for the second time in just two weeks First Lady Michelle Obama has paid a visit to our fair city, looking stunning at every stop. We're gonna have more on her visit just ahead.

     ...

     MATT LAUER: First Lady Michelle Obama has dazzled New York City for the second time in just a couple of weeks. "Today's" national correspondent Amy Robach has the details on that. Amy, good morning.

     [On screen headline: "Back In The Big Apple, First Lady Returns To New York."]

     AMY ROBACH: Good morning, Matt. Everyone takes notice when the First Lady is out on the town here in the Big Apple and Monday was no exception. Michelle Obama came to the Big Apple for a Mets double-header yesterday, but there wasn't a baseball in sight. The First Lady hit the Metropolitan Museum of Art by day and the Metropolitan Opera House at night - a tour of high culture which marked her second trip to New York in just two weeks.
     JODI KANTOR, NEW YORK TIMES: You look at the kind of parties that the Met hosts and if you look at the top ballet galas in New York they always have big celebrities there, but Mrs. Obama is a different order of magnitude.
     ROBACH: The day began with the First Lady joining local schoolchildren in a ribbon-cutting ceremony at The Metropolitan Museum of Arts newly refurbished American Arts Wing.
     MICHELLE OBAMA: Our future as an innovative country depends on ensuring that every one has access to the arts and to cultural opportunity.
     ROBACH: Her last trip to New York included a speaking engagement at Time magazine's 100 Gala, where she was also honored as one of the 100 Most Influential People in the World. This trip Mrs. Obama graces the pages of a different sort of magazine, taking a turn from high culture to pop culture. Mrs. Obama was recently named to Maxim's Hot 100 list.
     KANTOR: I think it shows how broad her appeal is right now.
     ROBACH: Monday night was ladies night at the Metropolitan Opera House. The Second Lady of the United States Dr. Jill Biden accompanied the First Lady to the American Ballet Theater Spring Gala, previewing the company's eight week season.
     OBAMA: I am thrilled to be here in support of American Ballet Theater.
     KANTOR: Mrs. Obama is in some ways a very traditional First Lady. Jackie Kennedy Onassis was a great champion of the American Ballet Theater and her visits not only show that she wants people to support these organizations but she's also adding a big dose of presidential glamour.
     ROBACH: Supporting the arts is important to both of the Obamas. The President included an additional $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts in his economic stimulus package. Matt?
     LAUER: Alright, Amy thank you very much.
     MEREDITH VIEIRA: You were at the ballet with the First Lady?
     LAUER PUTTING ON A PROPER ACCENT: Yes we were.
     AL ROKER: Yes that's right. It was very cultural.
     (laughter)
     LAUER: Finger sandwiches and tea, we did. Yeah.
     VIEIRA: How nice.
     LAUER: Al was there.
     VIEIRA: You were there too?
     ROKER: Yeah had a good time. Got all gussied up. Yeah I had a great nap.
     VIEIRA: I was, I was, I was-
     ROKER: No, it was fantastic. It was a great evening.
     LAUER: It was nice. It was a sampling of all the ballets they're gonna be putting on during the current season.
     VIEIRA: Wow, nice.
     ROKER: Including one that was especially choreographed with Herbie Hancock playing the piano.
     VIEIRA: Really?
     LAUER: Yeah it was cool.
     ROKER: Yeah it was fantastic.
     LAUER: Really cool.
     VIEIRA REFERENCING EARLIER COMMENT ABOUT WEATHER BRINGING GNATS OUT: I was at home-
     LAUER: Were ya?
     VIEIRA: -swatting gnats. Yeah. That's what I was doing.
     LAUER: Clearly not a patron of the arts like we are.
     ROKER: That's right.
     VIEIRA REFERRING TO ROKER'S TIE: I like the purple, by the way. That's very Michelle Obama. The purple, right?
     ROKER: Well thank you.
     VIEIRA OVER VIDEO OF MICHELLE OBAMA WEARING PURPLE DRESS: The look is very trendy.

-- Brent Baker