† Every Bubble Bursts Eventually: A Quinnipiac University poll of 2,069 registered voters finds that 50 percent do not think President Barack Hussein Obama should be re-elected vs. 41 percent who think he should get a second term. In the poll, Obama runs neck-and-neck with an unmanned Republican in a hypothetical 2012 race (36 percent to 37 percent).

 

Obama’s approval ratings are also at an all-time low, at 42 percent; his disapproval rating is at 48 percent. Dems approve Obama by the same percentage that Repubs disapprove of him (80 percent and 81 percent, respectively). Half of indies disapprove of Obama, as do 44 percent of women, 52 percent of men and 54 percent of whites.

 

† Is Obama Already A Lame Duck?: Back in Walter Cronkite’s day, notes MedaPost's TV Blog, “the White House would request networks give it a prime-time spot for a Presidential address  - perhaps on a topic as critical as, say, launching missiles in a distant land to fight a dictator versed in terrorism and prevent genocide”:

 

Those requests were largely pro forma. ABC, CBS and NBC would say yes, no problem.

 

The trio could use the speech to provide exposure for their news operations. Maybe they also felt that, since they were on the public airwaves, providing the President with a chance to reach the most people was good public service.

 

No longer. Even a President promising to answer questions about a military initiative with an unclear national interest isn’t considered a bankable star. It’s not a sure bet a network will alter its schedule for the Commander in Chief and his commercial-free programming.

 

And the White House seems willing to play along.

 

The latest example came Monday with the President’s Libyan speech. ABC wasn’t exactly thrilled at the prospect of having to preempt “Dancing with the Stars,” while the other networks weren’t keen on schedule changes either.

 

The White House apparently understood and negotiations with the networks resulted in the speech airing at 7:30 p.m., according to the New York Times. …

 

Willingness to give the speech before prime time marks an extraordinary capitulation on the White House’s part. These days, many Americans on the East Coast aren’t even home from work at 7:30, while and [sic] out West are still locked in a cubicle, though they can watch on the Web.

 

People could spend their time watching Obama on the Web, but they don’t (second item).

 

† Media Irrelevancy – A Self-Inflicted Wound: The New York Times’ bombshell article about how GE gamed the tax code so that the federal government owed the company money instead of the other way around was widely picked up by the MSM, cable news and the blogosphere. At NBC – which is owned by GE - it wasn’t considered newsworthy enough to include in the evening newscast rundown, reports The Washington Post:

 

During its Friday broadcast, “NBC Nightly News With Brian Williams” had no time to mention that America’s largest corporation had essentially avoided paying federal taxes in 2010. Or its Saturday, Sunday or Monday broadcasts, either. …

 

“This was a straightforward editorial decision, the kind we make daily around here,” said Lauren Kapp, spokeswoman for NBC News. Kapp declined to discuss how NBC decides what’s news or, in this case, what isn’t.

 

But to others, NBC’s silence looks like something between a lapse and a coverup. The satirical “Daily Show” on Monday noted that “Nightly News” had time on Friday to squeeze in a story about the Oxford English Dictionary adding such terms as “OMG” and “muffin top,” but didn’t bother with the GE story.

 

Ignoring stories about its parent company’s activities is “part of a troubling pattern” for NBC News, said Peter Hart, a director at Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a liberal media watchdog group that often documents instances of corporate interference in news. He cited a series of GE-related stories that NBC’s news division has underplayed over the years, from safety issues in GE-designed nuclear power plants to the dumping of hazardous chemicals into New York’s Hudson River by GE-owned plants.

 

What’s more, Hart notes, NBC News has covered corporate tax-avoidance stories before — that is, when they didn’t involve GE.

 

† Can The Nutrition Police Lay Off Coffee, Already?: According to The New York Times the first salvo in “the caffeine wars” was fired 100 years ago in Chattanooga, TN, where a lawsuit against the Coca-Cola filed by a USDA scientist “grabbed headlines for weeks and produced scientific research that holds up to this day”:

 

Harvey Washington Wiley, the “crusading chemist” who led the Bureau of Chemistry in the United States Department of Agriculture, had brought a lawsuit against the Coca-Cola Company, accusing it of adulterating the drink by adding a harmful ingredient [80 milligrams per serving ]. (Current levels of caffeine in a Coke are much lower.)

 

Preparing its defense, the company found a gap in the existing research on caffeine. “When their scientists took a look at the data, they had all of these animal studies, and didn’t really have the human data they needed,” said Ludy T. Benjamin Jr., a professor of psychology at Texas A & M University who has studied the trial. “So they were looking for someone to come up with some human data, and in a hurry.”

 

Coca-Cola hired a Barnard College psychology instructor named Harry Levi Hollingworth. He mustered 16 subjects aged 19 to 39, including occasional, moderate and regular caffeine users, along with abstainers. …They took caffeine capsules and placebos - double blinded, so neither they nor the researcher knew which was which - and “soda fountain” drinks with and without caffeine. The trial looming, Hollingworth did it all in just 40 days.  …

 

Because the Chattanooga case was dismissed, the jury issued no verdict on the larger questions argued in the courtroom: How much caffeine is too much? Is it different when added to soft drinks than as a natural constituent of coffee? Is it habit-forming? Should it be marketed to youths? And how should the federal government regulate it?

 

And that is why the FDA has not set a regulatory limit on caffeine – and why the nutrition police keep trying to vilify the natural stimulant (AKA the one that got away).

 

† Barefoot Contessa Snubs Cancer-Stricken Boy: After getting bitch-slapped by the blogosphere, Ina Garten (AKA "The Barefoot Contessa") suddenly “became aware,” says her spokesperson, that little Enzo Pereda's dying wish was to cook a dish with her on her Food Network show. For the Make-A-Wish Foundation and Enzo’s family, though, the offer is a day late and a duck salad short, reports ABC News:

 

"Ina of Enzo's story this weekend and will be calling him today," a spokesperson for Garten said in a statement to ABCNews.com. "She looks forward to inviting him to spend some time with her at the studios." …

 

In a statement released today, Make-A-Wish said it supports Garten's move but noted that it's focusing on Pereda's second wish - to swim with dolphins.

 

"Enzo and his family have publicly expressed excitement about his dolphin wish," a spokesperson for the foundation said in a statement to ABCNews.com. "According to his mother, Enzo has started sleeping in his swimsuit because he wants to be ready when he dreams about them at night."

 

The statement added, "We have been informed that Ina Garten plans to contact Enzo independently of the Make-A-Wish Foundation, and we wish them well."

 

† Mom Convinces Son He’s Dying Of Cancer So She Can Scam Well-Wishers: Macomb County (MI) Circuit Court Judge Richard Caretti ordered Carol Schnuphase, 47, to spend a year in jail for second-degree child abuse and acting under false pretenses. Schnuphase had pled no contest to charges that she drugged her 12-year-old son to make him appear to have cancer and collected thousands of dollars in donations for his treatment, reports The Associated Press:

 

"Your conduct, ma'am, in this case is reprehensible. To tell a vulnerable, defenseless young boy that he is dying of cancer for your own pecuniary gain is almost beyond the realm of comprehension," said Caretti, who based his sentence on a deal reached with Schnuphase's lawyer. "To then give your son strong opiate-based pills crushed up in his apple sauce to further your despicable scheme defies all reason."

 

The defendant's aunt, Lorraine Kelsch, said after the sentencing that the family had wanted Schnuphase to be sentenced to five years in prison.

 

"My reaction is disgust," Kelsch said. "That sentence stinks. It's horrible."

 

Prosecutors said a hospital tested the boy, who is now 13, and declared him cancer-free, although he was going through opiate withdrawal. …

 

Admitting that telling her son he had cancer "is terrible,” defense attorney Dominic Greco explained that Schnuphase was “basically at the end of her rope” because of her husband's sudden death and the recent loss of her job.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (second item, The Media Love Obama, But He Doesn’t Love Them Back): Orlando Sentinel reporter Scott Powers writes that it “was news to me” that he had been “kidnapped” when he was “imprisoned” in a closet during a fundraiser at which Vice President Joe Biden had been a featured speaker:

 

Only in this politically-charged environment, those spin and details can crystallize toward scandal. That’s especially true when it involves the vice president of the United States in an administration that has enraged a segment of American society.

 

Here’s what happened. I showed up at the private home of developer, philanthropist and political contributor Alan Ginsburg Wednesday morning to file a pool report on the visit there by Biden and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Orlando. When I arrived I was told I would not be able to speak with any of the people at the party, and that I was to wait in a room until Biden and Nelson arrived. I went in willingly, with the understanding that I was free to leave - but if I left I’d probably have to leave the house entirely, and not get to cover the speeches.

 

It was more than an hour, and when I was finally led out, Ginsburg, Nelson and Biden were just getting ready to talk. I listened, recorded the speeches and took notes, then was led back to the little room to wait until they left, about 15 more minutes, before they led me to my car. …

 

Now we have ClosetGate: the latest big Washington scandal, it seems.

 

Orlando Sentinel readers were somewhat taken aback that Powers sees nothing untoward about his treatment, judging by some of their comments:

 

DHH: “President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history”. - The White House website

 

PineKnot: Now, the reporter, who initially was probably pretty ticked off, is being a good little boy and explaining that it was all a mistake. … Sentinel, is there a brown ring around your nose?

 

Tar Heel: Scott, did it never occur to you to question the journalistic ethics of agreeing to “cover” an event under such preconditions? If you aren’t allowed to see, speak with or report on who is attending the event, only report the contents of a canned speech, what is the point of going? Ask yourself if you would have agreed to do this if it were a Dick Cheney fundraiser.

Isn’t the public’s right to know who is financially supporting a politician more important than merely regurgitating a canned fundraising speech? Isn’t it revealing that the only real news out of the “event” is you being locked in a closet?

 

Tom: [T]his reader does not care one bit about what happened in that closet. Don’t you think that it would have been newsworthy if VP Biden had made it through a 20 minute presentation without inserting his foot in his mouth?

 

rs7316: A real reporter would ask questions and demand answers. That used to be the media’s job. But alas, it’s gone from government watchdog to government lap dog. Very dangerous trend, indeed.

 

mj loehrer: Okay, so you weren’t kidnapped. The result is you look like a buffoon and are more than willing to accept shoddy treatment. Play your cards right and there might be a presidential promotion for you. Personally, I’d resent being treated like a sack of crap but, hey, I’m not a “journalist”.

 

Mb: You do not think you are a dupe Scott? Pull your irrational head out and see this for what it is. The thugs that work for the O in charge have absolutely no respect for you or any member of the press. You are deemed nothing more than a useful idiot. Stop being one and open your eyes.

 

For his part, Daily Show host Jon Stewart did a sketch in which he asked “handcuffed, boiler room-bound” Wyatt Cenac “why White House reporters put up with the press office’s onerous restrictions.” The answer: Reporters are just freaky-deaky gluttons for punishment.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (third item, Mortgage Loan Modification Less Than Advertised:  President Barack Hussein Obama’s signature program to save millions of Americans from foreclosure - the Home Assistance Modification Program (HAMP) – fell so short of homeowners’ expectations that the Republican-led House has voted to rescind $29 billion in unspent funding, reports Human Events:  

 

The White House … released a statement stating that Obama will veto the bill if it passes the Democrat-held Senate.

 

The House passed the HAMP Termination Act of 2011 on Tuesday by a vote of 252-170, 1 present. The unspent TARP money will go toward reducing the U.S. debt, which is currently more than $14.1 trillion. …

 

The Special Inspector General for for TARP Neil Barofsky testified before the House Financial Services Committee about the failures of HAMP and its use of TARP funds.

 

“HAMP has been beset by problems from the outset and, despite frequent retooling, continues to fall woefully short of meeting its original expectations,” testified Barofsky. “Today the program is under siege from all quarters, with near universal agreement that the program has failed to meet its goals.” …

 

HAMP … has only permanently modified 521,630 mortgages in the two years, spending $840 million. Even Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has conceded that HAMP “won’t come close” to helping the promised three to four million homeowners.

 

The New York Times explains why the ill-conceived, ill-considered initiative was doomed to fail from the beginning:

 

Treasury officials invited Neil M. Barofsky, the special inspector general for the bank bailout, to discuss a rescue plan. They told him details of the plan were still weeks away. “That night, I was driving home and I heard on the radio that the president was going to announce it next Wednesday,” Mr. Barofsky recalled. “It was a ‘ready, fire, aim’ approach.”

 

Ready or not, President Obama announced the housing assistance program on Feb. 18, 2009. Banks and mortgage brokers could extend mortgages, or cut the amount of the loan or the interest rate. A monthly payment could not exceed 31 percent of gross income.

 

In return, the administration offered payments to banks and servicers. …

 

[O]fficials tried to fine-tune the mortgage program, adding elements and redirecting unused billions of dollars into the most distressed regions.

 

Each new version, however, added layers of complication.

 

Administration officials also cite unrealistic expectations, saying they underestimated the complexity of modifying millions of troubled loans. …

 

Federal regulators added their own confusion of overlapping authority and conflicts of interest.

 

Treasury hired Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-controlled mortgage finance giants, to oversee the program. This decision was problematic. As the Congressional Oversight Panel noted, these agencies “are highly conflicted because they hold the credit risk on most mortgages in the United States and have their own operational concerns.”

 

As if to underscore that point, Freddie Mac filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission noting that imposing penalties on banks could “negatively impact our relationships with these sellers/servicers, some of which are among our largest sources of mortgage loans.”

 

Treasury has paid the agencies a combined $212 million to administer the program.

 

The Treasury Department, too, was a reluctant enforcer, declining to impose fines or demand repayments. “This was structured as a voluntary program,” said Timothy Massad, acting assistant secretary. “We do not have the power to impose fines.”

 

Mr. Barofsky, the special inspector general, waves off protestations of powerlessness. How, he asked, could Treasury sign agreements to pay billions to banks without penalties for failure to comply?

 

“Treasury wasn’t willing to kick them in the only place that matters: in the pocketbook,” he said.

 

Now, extrapolate this to the kinetic military action in Libya.

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (fourth item, Look Before You Leap: Part II): Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) signed into law House Bill 2443, which makes it a felony for a doctor to perform an abortion based on the sex or race of the fetus. AZ is the first state in the nation that criminalizes abortions performed based on the unborn baby’s gender or race, reports The Arizona Republic:

 

The law allows the father of an aborted fetus - or, if the mother is a minor, the mother's parents - to take legal action against the doctor or other health-care provider who performed the abortion. If convicted of the felony, physicians would face up to seven years in jail and the loss of their medical license.

 

Opponents of the law questioned whether such abortions occur in the state. Well, if they do not then the law should not prevent any legal abortions. 

 

† Updates To Previous Posts (fourth item, Restorative Capital Punishment): Eric John King was executed for the murders of two people in a 1989 Phoenix convenience store robbery after the AZ Supreme Court declined to intervene after his defense attorney Michael Burke failed to convince the judges to stay the execution until the state switches to a new lethal injection protocol, reports The Associated Press:

 

As he was sedated, King breathed heavily for several seconds then appeared to go to sleep.

 

Corrections Director Charles Ryan announced that King was declared dead at 10:22 a.m., 13 minutes after a medical staff member walked into the death chamber and confirmed that King had been sedated. …

 

Burke said after the execution that there is no way to know whether King experienced pain after first being injected with sodium thiopental, a sedative that Burke has argued could be ineffective. The second drug paralyzes the inmate before potassium chloride is injected to stop his heart, so if the sedative doesn't work through the entire procedure, King could have been in pain without any way to show it.

 

"You'd have no way of knowing if he was in pain or not," Burke said. "As an observer, he closed his eyes and took some breaths, and I didn't see him move after. It doesn't really give me any solace." …

 

Ryan announced Friday that Arizona will switch to using just one drug in an effort to allay any "perceived concerns" that sodium thiopental is ineffective, but only after the scheduled executions of King and Daniel Wayne Cook on April 5. …

 

Texas and Oklahoma recently announced they are switching from sodium thiopental to pentobarbital in their three-drug protocol. Ohio has switched to using only pentobarbital for its executions, and Ryan said that's the drug Arizona might start using.

 

Meanwhile, Lundbeck, the Danish maker of the sedative pentobarbital disappointed death penalty opponents by announcing that it will not block sales of the drug to prisons, reports The Wall Street Journal:

 

The company considered this idea “very seriously” but ultimately decided that it can not effectively block distribution to prisons, Lundbeck CEO Ulf Wiinberg told the Law Blog in an interview.

 

“We have explored the idea and don’t think it would make any difference,” Wiinberg said.

 

Drug distributors, he said, do business with thousands of customers. Given that wide network of end users, Wiinberg said, it is “not realistic” to expect a distributor to ensure that pentobarbital would not be misused in executions - and to be responsible if it was misused.