Media Matters: The politically motivated selective-victimhood of Sarah Palin

You've got to hand it to Fox News contributor Sarah Palin. After all, there aren't many people who can make news with a single Facebook post. Her status updates are like catnip for journalists and media types.

In a story detailing purported liberal criticism of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel,The Wall Street Journal reported this week that, in a private meeting, Emanuel called plans by liberal groups to run ads targeting conservative Democrats "F-ing retarded."

Following news of the hurtful comment, Palin, the mother of a child with Down syndrome, took to Facebook to demand Emanuel's firing in a post she titled, "Are You Capable of Decency, Rahm Emanuel?"

The deservedly stern comments of an offended mother or the hypocritical nonsense of a political opportunist?

First, it's worth noting that Emanuel has apologized for the comment at least twice now. It's also worth noting that just a few short weeks ago, Palin fretted that we were becoming a nation where we -- I'm guessing all the Joe the Plumbers out there -- couldn't use words that were "politically incorrect."

Far from consistent, Palin has exposed herself as someone who deploys selective-victimhood as a politically motivated weapon.

How else can one explain her harsh rebuke of Emanuel and near silence when it comes to eerily similar language used by conservative radio talker Rush Limbaugh and her Fox News colleague Glenn Beck?

Last January, during an interview with Mary Lynn Rajskub, a star of Fox Broadcasting Co.'24, Beck laughed at the idea of artwork produced by children with Down syndrome, asking, "What do the paintings of the retarded children go for?" Then there was the time right after the 2008 election when he went after Newsweek over a story on Palin that he found objectionable. Purporting to offer the magazine's view of the former governor, he played the role of an unnamed Newsweek staffer saying, "When it's really, truly about Sarah Palin and how stupid, she's practically retarded. Yes. I think that's appropriate word to use for Sarah Palin, retarded. I think that's an... if you would like a retarded person running the State of Alaska, just higgeldy-piggeldy."

So what did Palin, then the newly minted Fox News contributor, have to say about these comments during her first hour-long sit-down interview with Beck?

Nothing. Nada. Crickets.

Responding to the controversy surrounding Palin and Emanuel, Limbaugh said liberals who complained about health care reform "are retards." Sure, El Rushbo went on to say that he was just using the term in "quoting Emanuel," but it wasn't the first time the language had appeared on his radio program. Almost a year ago, long before the Emanuel gaffe, while discussing the flu, Limbaugh appeared to mock those concerned with the use of such language, saying, "[a]nything you can do to stop it or to arrest it or to retard -- sorry -- to 'Special Olympic' its duration, then it -- you should do it."

On Thursday, Limbaugh addressed his controversial comments and suggested that Palin wouldn't "denounce" him because she "knows I do this kind of" thing. Just four hours later, responding to a request for comment on Limbaugh's comments by Greg Sargent of Washington Post Co.'s The Plum Line blog, Palin's spokesperson provided a broad statement saying in part that use of the word constitutes "crude and demeaning name calling."

How long would Palin stand up to radio's reigning king of radical right-wing vitriol? Not long at all.

The following day on his radio program, Limbaugh told listeners that a Palin representative had called him in a "panic" to explain her criticism. Heaven forbid she should offend Boss Limbaugh.

During the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, Palin offered then-Senator Hillary Clinton advice on dealing with the pervasive sexism Clinton faced in the media, saying essentially that she should stop whining.

If Palin can't be consistent in her criticism, perhaps she should take her own advice.
Other Major Stories

What's in a name? For Glenn Beck, the answer, it appears, is everything

On Thursday, Beck was revisiting one of his favorite subjects: the hidden history of Barack Obama. Reflecting on how Obama had, as a young man, gone from calling himself Barry to using his given name of Barack, Beck said this:

He chose to use his name Barack for a reason -- to identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical?

Beck's history regarding discussions of race speaks for itself. He has said Obama possesses "a deep-seated hatred for white people." Soon after, he defended those remarks, stating once again that, "I think the president is a racist." He has suggested that Obama is seeking to become a "slavemaster." He has pushed the idea that Mexican immigrants want to "reclaim" California and Texas. He called Justice Sonia Sotomayor a "racist" on at least three separate occasions. Beck has portrayed the Democratic health care reform effort as "the beginning of reparations," a theme he has repeated on both his Fox News and radio shows, saying that Obama plans to "settle old racial scores through new social justice." During a discussion of former White House green jobs official Van Jones' past, he baselessly juxtaposed Jones' picture with footage from a riot. He hasclaimed that India lacked "flush toilets" and said that the Ganges sounded like "a disease."

All of these examples are from the last year. The deeper you dig, the worse it gets.

And yet, when Media Matters accused Beck of racial insensitivity, he responded indignantly that "nothing could be further from the truth."

"If you don't see why some people would get upset that you accused the president of adopting his African name in order to repudiate his American identity and connect with his father's radical Kenyan heritage," wrote Media Matters' Simon Maloy yesterday, "then I'm afraid you might be a lost cause."

Indeed, he is -- and he's not interested in being saved. Though he portrays himself as an average Joe just trying to make sense of the world, Beck is actually a wildly successful broadcaster with decades of experience. Everything he does and says is deliberate, and by now, it should be overwhelmingly obvious that he routinely crafts his rhetoric to appeal to the worst impulses in his audience. He insults minorities, and uses racially provocative language and imagery, because he wants to stir resentments among viewers and listeners. There is simply no other way to explain the racially charged content he has made a staple of his work.

Is it any wonder why at least 80 advertisers have fled his Fox News program and civil rights groups have condemned him over his latest comments?

This week's media columns

This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert asks what Bill Buckley would say about today's "conservative journalism"; and Jamison Foser looks at Andew Breitbart and the Vince Foster conspiracists.

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to join in on the discussion.

Media Matters Minute now on YouTube

For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes /RSS) to the Minute's daily podcast hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.


Source

Spartans' Tom Izzo still motivated by struggles against Michigan early in career

Tom Izzo hasn’t forgotten.

It wasn’t always the case that Michigan State dominated the Michigan basketball series. Many of today’s Spartans certainly can’t remember it.

Draymond Green said he never even paid attention to Wolverines basketball as he grew up in Saginaw. And Kalin Lucas said he was unaware that Izzo’s first five games against Michigan resulted in five double-digit losses.

“But coach, if he did lose those five straight -- I know coach, and he was most likely pissed off,” Lucas said.

In some ways, he still is.

The games weren’t close. The margins were 22, 29, 13, 20 and 10 points. They brought some snarky comments, including one from a certain Grand Rapids columnist who called Izzo Michigan’s “lapdog.”

The three seasons involved included a pair of NIT berths, after five of Jud Heathcote’s last six teams qualified for the NCAA tournament, and there was open question whether Heathcote’s former assistant was the right guy for the job.

About the same time, over at the rival university, football fans wondered the same thing about one Lloyd Carr.

Both would win national championships.

Both would enjoy extended periods of dominance against their in-state rival.

And both fueled themselves, for years thereafter, with those early memories.

“I’m motivated by the 12 years before those five games,” Izzo said Monday, leading into tonight’s showdown at Crisler Arena here. “I’m motivated by the fact that every alum in this country is motivated by it. I’m motivated because it stands in the way of us, hopefully, getting to our goals at the beginning of the year.

“But your rival is your rival. And I’ve said a million times, people try to make it out ‘Is he as passionate about it? Does he hate them as much?’ And the answer is yes to all those things. OK? It’s yes to all those things.”

He has respect for Michigan, he said, heightened during the Tommy Amaker era, when the Wolverines reached the cusp of the NCAA tournament but never quite made it, with a resultant coaching change.

That grew with the John Beilein hiring -- and now, the Michigan coach, after losses each of the past two years, when the rivalry was played only once each season, is the one burdened with proving he can win the Great Lakes State showdown.

“I have respect for coaches. I have respect for programs,” Izzo said. “But it is what it is. And I’m sure the feeling is mutual down there.”

Izzo said he thinks he became obsessed with Michigan in his early years as head coach, and with how fans and alumni emphasized that wanting to win wasn’t enough, that hatred also is requisite.

He didn’t really need that lesson, though. He already could draw upon the memory of some good U-M teams in the 1980s, one of them a 1989 national championship team, followed in short order by the Fab Five. Including his years as an assistant under Heathcote, Izzo lost 19 of his first 29 games against the Wolverines.

That has changed, of course. The Spartans have won 16 of 19 in the series, over a 12-season span.

Defeat honed the senses. The “passion to win, the sleepless nights, the excitement” remain the same, whether trying to preserve a winning streak or break a losing skid.

Motivation gets stirred by talking to ex-players about their Michigan reminiscences, or by hearing from alumni about the water-cooler expectations they have the next morning.

It’s 2010, a different era in the relationship between Michigan and Michigan State basketball.
But in the buildup, the preparation, the anticipation, for one man, it is always 1995.

“I think back to those beatings,” he said. “I think back to things that happened back then.”

Then he sets his jaw, grits his teeth, and plots retribution.


Source

Outpouring of support motivated by compassion

If there's anything good that comes from a humanitarian catastrophe on the staggering scale of the Haiti earthquake, it's the reminder of our own common humanity.

The international response-- from the hundreds of millions of dollars in donations from individuals and corporations to the disaster relief provided by different governments -- transcends politics or economics or self-interest.

This unprecedented outpouring of support is motivated by compassion for the people of this ravaged nation. While there are acknowledged logistical problems distributing aid in the ruined capital of Port-au-Prince -- and delays caused by the sheer destruction wrought by the 7.0-richter magnitude quake -- the difficulties do not detract from this compassion.

In fact, the very first country to provide aid -- the neighbouring Dominican Republic -- put aside lingering animosities that dated back to the 19th century to provide clean water, food and heavy equipment to help in rescue efforts.

The government of Qatar, a small Muslim nation bordered by Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf, sent more than 50 tonnes of desperately needed supplies on a C-17, while the Israeli government erected a field hospital near the United Nations building in Port-au-Prince. The government of Iran announced plans to send 30 tonnes of emergency aid, including tents and medicine.

The European Union provided an immediate three-million euros in funding while pledging another 600-million euros in long-term support for emergency aid and reconstruction. The governments of Canada and the U.S. -- the countries that have taken the lead roles in assistance efforts -- have both more than $100 million in financial aid, as well as troops and equipment to help with rescue efforts.

In total, almost 120 of the world's nations have pledged to helping the people of Haiti.

These commitments have been matched by an incredible response from intergovernmental organizations and hundreds of nongovernment agencies like the International Red Cross and the Salvation Army.

In Canada, the Red Cross has already raised $22 million for relief efforts. Locally, Oxford residents were lined up outside of the Woodstock offices of the Red Cross to make donations while local businesses have made their own financial contributions.

With hundreds of thousands feared dead and millions left homeless -- and fears of an unparalleled crisis as supplies begin to dwindle -- much of the world has mobilized and that, given the usual international tensions and willful ignorance, is cause for hope. This common response shows that we are capable of putting aside our differences and working for the betterment of all.

If only we could do it a little more often.


Source

In Somerville, reluctant Coakley voters motivated by health care

SOMERVILLE -- In the Democratic primary last month for US Senate, this city backed the campaign of Representative Michael Capuano, a native son and former mayor who ultimately came up short against Martha Coakley.

Capuano's loss did not prevent voters from turning out in droves today for the general election, with a polling place at the Dante Club bustling early. Several people interviewed on the way out of the social hall described themselves as reluctant Coakley supporters motivated by the prospect of a victory by Republican Scott Brown and concerns that it would thwart the health care legislation before Congress.

"To be honest, I wasn't all that enthusiastic about Martha Coakley. But, you know, I think the health care thing is so important," said Chris O’Brien, a 29-year-old singer-songwriter who began paying closer attention after the race tightened. "I didn't know who Scott Brown was two weeks ago. . . [but] I know he’s been gaining some serious momentum over the last couple of weeks, so we'll see. It’s hard to imagine Massachusetts with a Republican senator."

In the primaries, 670 of the precinct's 2,300-plus voters cast ballots, leaving poll workers in December with little to do for stretches other than sip coffee and leaf through magazines. But this morning, 334 had voted by 10 a.m., with the line snaking down the corridor at times during a pre-work rush. Some had not voted since the 2008 presidential election.

The Coakley campaign was going door-to-door among the neighborhood's multi-family houses to check off potential supporters and encourage turnout, in a densely populated area that was once the domain largely of immigrant and working-class families and that is now home to scores of young professionals and graduate students.

"It's been busy, exceptionally so," said Niki Voorthamis, the precinct's warden, noting that a dozen or so voters had already come in who were not on the rolls at all or who had fallen to the inactive list because of recent failure to vote or return the city's last census.

At that moment, as if on cue, Mara Brod approached Voorthamis's table, after the clerks near the door failed to find her name on their list. Brod, a 39-year-old photographer who has lived in Somerville for over a decade, confided that she had not voted since 2008 and had recently moved within the city.

"I just wanted to see if I'm still registered at my old apartment," Brod told Voorthamis, who jotted down her past and present addresses on a pad and picked up a walkie-talkie to call the city's election headquarters. A fuzzy reply came back; Brod was on the list at the Cummings School, nearly a mile's walk in the snow.

"You hear that? You're at 3-2, and I'll tell you where that is," Voorthamis said. "You're on the inactive list but you can vote there."

Outside, Brod said she was motivated by a desire to see national health care legislation pass, not because she loves Coakley.

"I feel like she's who we have, and I'm a little disappointed about the way she ran her campaign," Brod said. "But I guess they just didn't see this coming."


Source

Less motivated people achieve success on fun tasks

Washington, Jan 20: People who are highly motivated generally do better on specific tasks than those who are less motivated, but when it comes to fun tasks, the latter bunch emerges as the winner.

According to lead researcher Dolores Albarrac¡n from University of Illinois, the findings suggest that two students may respond quite differently to a teacher's exhortation that they strive for excellence.

The study suggests that those who are "chronically uninterested in achievement" are not operating out of a desire to do badly.

Their differing responses simply may reflect the fact that they have different goals.

"The competitive mindset, the achievement mindset becomes a huge de-motivator for those who don't necessarily value excellence as much as they value their well-being," said Albarrac¡n.

"Perhaps the reason they don't care to do well is because they want to do something else; they want to enjoy themselves - which is not a bad goal," she added.

In four studies, the researchers evaluated how participants' attitudes toward achievement, called their "chronic achievement motivation," influenced their performance on various tasks.

It showed that those with high achievement motivation did better on a task when they also were exposed to subconscious "priming" (the flash of a word on a computer screen, for example, that appeared too briefly to be consciously noticed) that related to winning, mastery or excellence.

Those with low achievement motivation did worse under the same conditions.

Similarly, when given a choice, those with high achievement motivation were more likely to resume an interrupted task, such as a word-search puzzle, which they were told tested their verbal reasoning ability, than their peers, who were more likely to switch to a task perceived as fun.

The researchers also found that those with high achievement motivation actually did worse on a word-search puzzle when they were told the exercise was fun and they had been exposed to achievement primes, such as the words "excel," "compete" or "dominate."

Their counterparts, who were not very motivated to achieve, did better under the same conditions.

These finding suggest that achievement primes inhibit the desire to have fun in those who are motivated to achieve, the authors wrote. But in people who lack achievement motivation, the same cues seem to enhance their desire - and ability - to perform a task seen as fun.

"It's not that those with high achievement motivation always perform better. You can also get the low achievement motivation folks to perform better than the highs when you present a task as enjoyable and fun," Albarrac¡n added.

The study appears in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.


Source

Part loyalty and vanity motivated the Senate

Like desperate last-minute Christmas shoppers who would grab any gift at any price, the U.S. Senate rushed through a hasty and ill-conceived rewrite of healthcare legislation on Christmas Eve. It was a holiday party—a total party line vote.
President Obama’s message to senators seemed focused more on party loyal and an appeal to desires for glory than on what Americans want or need. Plus the spirit of “What's in it for me?” rather than the unselfish spirit of Christmas.
With public support collapsing all about them — 61 percent in opposition, according to CNN’s December polling — many Democrats seemed motivated by a feeling that they’ve gone too far to turn back now, even if it’s in the wrong direction.
They could invoke Benjamin Franklin’s aphorism: “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
Franklin, however, had a much nobler purpose in mind: independence from government tyranny.
The ultimate language remains a mystery to many, concealed in two thousand pages of wrapping. The governors of New York and California, after digging to the bottom, crying foul over billions in new costs that will further wreck their already imperiled state budgets.
With or without a so-called “public option,” it’s certain that the bill will displace millions of Americans from their private insurance, put Washington in charge of all healthcare and insurance, and expand the number of people who depend on taxpayers to pay for their coverage.
Bureaucrats such as the new “health choices commissioner” would be granted czar-like powers to impose what would function as a federally controlled, single-payer system. That power would extend over everyone, even those who think they still have private insurance.
“It’s now or never” summed up the White House message as President Obama asks his fellow Democrats to disregard the public opposition and pass Obamacare anyway. White House operatives told Politico this is the “last chance” and “last train leaving the station” as Christmas approached.
The appeal to unity and glory is an echo of the argument Obama used to rally final votes for the House version of the legislation. As ABC News said about that House meeting, Obama used an argument based on political calculation: "At the end of his speech, Obama got a rousing ovation for saying, "I am absolutely confident that, when I sign this bill in the Rose Garden, each and every one of you will be able to look back and say, 'This was my finest moment in politics.'"
This appeal to political vanity is very different from the claims the president makes about his proposals in public meetings. So it’s no wonder that Obama has abandoned his campaign pledge to conduct healthcare negotiations publicly and on C-SPAN. Now the House and Senate versions of the bill will be reconciled behind closed doors (but with the White House well-represented).
Obama had said in 2008, "I'm going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We'll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies — they'll get a seat at the table, they just won't be able to buy every chair. But what we will do is, we'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN."
Those who want to commit political suicide will suffer the consequences at the hands of the voters. The problem is that damage won’t end there. Dramatic new costs will be imposed on 160 million Americans who already have health insurance. Unfair adverse consequences will abound, such as a $3,000 penalty on businesses that hire low-income workers. It will be costlier than ever to create new jobs or to buy insurance (except for those who are granted new government subsidies at the expense of taxpayers).
Rather than appealing to party loyalty and political vanity, even many on the left are calling for President Obama and Congress to slow down and start over. But they so far show no signs of doing that.
(Ernest Istook, who was a congressman from Oklahoma for 14 years, now is a distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation.)


Source

Motivated Vonn wins 3d straight downhill

HAUS IM ENNSTAL, Austria - Nothing like a “stupid’’ comment about her weight to make Lindsey Vonn ski faster.

She won her third straight World Cup downhill yesterday and regained the overall standings lead from Maria Riesch of Germany.

Austrian media this week reported that Vonn, the reigning downhill and overall champion, would have an advantage in speed events because she was carrying additional weight.

“Any time people say stupid things in the media, it always makes me more motivated to try to ski faster,’’ Vonn said. “It’s obvious that I am an athlete and not an overweight person, so I thought it was pretty ridiculous. It just added fuel to the fire.’’

Vonn raced the course in 1 minute 38.84 seconds to beat Anja Paerson of Sweden by 0.35 seconds. Riesch took third, 0.39 behind the American.

“I really attacked today,’’ said Vonn, who is skiing with a bruised left arm after a crash in Lienz last month but still posted the fastest first intermediate time. She is unbeaten in downhill since February 2008.

Former slalom champion Giorgio Rocca pulled a muscle in training and might miss the Vancouver Olympics. The Italian Winter Sports Federation said Rocca injured the thigh-groin area and will miss this weekend’s races in Switzerland . . . Two-time overall champion Bode Miller will try to earn a spot in the Olympic giant slalom when he returns to racing today after a three-week injury break. US coach Sasha Rearick said Miller spent the holidays in California and his injured ankle swelled during the flight.


Source