A few years back, after arriving by train to Madrid from Barcelona I happened on a square and it was filled with Muslims and some imam was on a speaker saying angry shit in Arabic, I started recording and suddenly I started getting angry looks and people started moving towards me, I walked away. It was clear by their actions that they were up to no good. This was 5 years after the 2004 Madrid the train bombings that killed 191 people and injured another 1,800.
All three network morning shows on Tuesday noted how President Obama agreed to meet with Governor Rick Perry to discuss the illegal immigration crisis, all labeling the Texas Republican to be the "harshest" and "strongest" "big critic" of the commander-in-chief's mishandling of the chaos on the border. The only problem was that none of the broadcasts featured a single second of Perry actually voicing that criticism. [Listen to the audio]
On ABC's Good Morning America, White House correspondent Jon Karl summarized Perry's recent condemnation of Obama's lack of action on the issue: "Perry has been one of the harshest critics here. On This Week he said he doesn't believe the President really cares whether or not the border is secure." Co-host George Stephanopoulos chimed in: "Yeah, he suggested there might even be a conspiracy to have more kids come over."
Rather than simply play an accurate clip of what Perry actually said on their network's own Sunday show, Karl and Stephanopoulos were content to portray him as some kind of conspiracy theorist.
On CBS This Morning, White House correspondent Bill Plante proclaimed: "Perry, who could be a Republican presidential candidate, has been one of the President's strongest critics on immigration."
Again, there was no clip of Perry speaking, but Plante did find time to scold the Governor for rejecting a brief frivolous photo-op initially offered by Obama: "The White House reached out to Perry after he turned down an airport greeting, even though Perry has come to the airport in the past when the President has come to Texas."
On NBC's Today, correspondent Peter Alexander declared:
This week, supporters of religious freedom cheered the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Hobby Lobby case. The Court was correct to protect business owners from being forced to violate their religious beliefs by paying for contraceptives. However, the decision was very limited in scope and application.
The Court’s decision only applies to certain types of businesses, for example, “closely-held corporations” that have a “sincere” religious objection to paying for contraceptive coverage. Presumably, federal courts or bureaucrats will determine if a business’s religious objection to the mandate is “sincere” or not and therefore eligible for an opt-out from one Obamacare mandate.
Opponents of the Court’s decision are correct that a religious objection does not justify a special exemption from the Obamacare contraception mandate, but that is because all businesses should be exempt from all federal mandates. Federal laws imposing mandates on private businesses violate the business owners’ rights of property and contract.
Mandated benefits such as those in Obamacare also harm
