Arizona Governor Jan Brewer on Friday posted a highly-humorous video on YouTube mocking members of the Obama administration that have voiced negative opinions about her state's new anti-illegal immigration law without even bothering to read it.

See if you can name them as you sing a long:

Stop the presses: a fill-in for Rachel Maddow on Friday actually busted the New York Times for misquoting Rand Paul in its article about the Tea Party senatorial candidate published earlier in the day.

As most readers are aware, Paul made some rather controversial statements on MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show" Wednesday.

Two days later, Adam Nagourney and Carl Hulse of the Times wrote: "Asked by Ms. Maddow if a private business had the right to refuse to serve black people, Mr. Paul replied, 'Yes.'"

As the Nation's Chris Hayes amazingly pointed out Friday, that's not what Paul said (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t Daily Paul via NB reader Russell Davis):

Texas-based New York Times reporter Michael Brick was in Austin in anticipation of a Board of Education vote on the political content of textbooks in Texas schools: “Texas School Board Set to Vote Textbook Revisions.”

Typical of the Times' coverage of the matter, Brick found lots of “conservatives” on one side of the debate over Texas textbooks in Friday's story, but no countervailing liberals, though they were in full protest mode at a hearing on Wednesday. Neither did Brick convey concerns of conservatives over liberal indoctrination in past editions of schoolbooks. Here's a sample of Brick's dense labeling:

After facing months of protest, conservative members of the Texas Board of Education were expected Thursday night to vote to teach schoolchildren a version of American history that emphasizes the roles of capitalist enterprise, the military, Christianity and modern Republican political figures.

Wednesday's Business Day column by the Times' liberal economic conscience David Leonhardt is another one for the food police files: “The Battle Over Taxing Soda.” Personal responsibility on such personal matters isn't a large concern in Leonhardt's worldview, as he readily compared lobbyists for the soda industry to lobbyists against tobacco companies and pollution laws.

Tobacco lobbyists spent years fighting regulation by claiming to be defending individual freedom, not the profits of tobacco companies. Detroit’s lobbyists did much the same to push back against seat belt and pollution laws. Wall Street has spent months opposing the financial regulation bill in the name of families and small businesses.

The latest example comes from Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and the rest of the soda industry, which is trying to defeat a soda tax now before the District of Columbia Council. The industry has succeeded recently in beating back similar taxes in New York and Philadelphia, and in keeping one out of the federal health overhaul bill. But the Washington Council seems to be seriously considering a penny-per-ounce tax on nondiet sodas, energy drinks and artificial juices. Council members are set to vote on the issue next week.

Perhaps Washington Post reporter Michael Birnbaum needs to brush up his reading comprehension skills. Either that or his bias is coloring what should be straightforward reporting.

Here's how Birnbaum opened his page A16 article in the May 22 paper:

The Texas state school board gave final approval Friday to controversial social studies standards that minimize the separation of church and state and say that America is not a democracy but a "constitutional republic." 

Really? The second point is ludicrous to describe as "controversial." The U.S. system of government is not direct democracy but a representative republic regulated by a constitution, hence a "constitutional republic."  As to the first allegation in Birnbaum's lead paragraph, this writer did some homework and found the actual text of the newly-approved standard in question, which applies to government courses:

Examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America and guaranteed its free exercise by saying that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, and compare and contrast this to the phrase “separation of church and state.” 

The notion that that standard "minimize[s]" the notion of "separation of church and state" must be read into the text of the actual newly-approved standard, it certainly isn't logically concluded from it.

Later in the article, Birnbaum insisted that "the new standards... draw an equivalency between Jefferson Davis's and Abraham Lincoln's inaugural addresses." Here's the actual language of the newly devised standard:

National Review's Rich Lowry on Saturday's "Fox News Watch" noted a bizarre relationship between Barack Obama and the media: "they're in love with the guy and he has contempt for them."

Host Jon Scott started the discussion by mentioning the peculiar irony of the President on Monday signing the Press Freedom Act while refusing to take any questions from media members at the event.

As the conversation ensued, Scott asked the National Review editor if anybody really cares that Obama hasn't had an official press conference in 43 weeks.

With the ball nicely teed up, Lowry knocked it way out of the park (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): 

A video of young girls provocatively dancing in skimpy outfits recently surfaced on the Internet. The public outcry it garnered was so great that the girls’ parents appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” to defend the dance routine. But the inappropriate dancing shouldn’t really be surprising in an era when girls are exposed to less-than ideal role models and bombarded with sexualized messages in the media.

From Lindsay Lohan to Britney Spears, positive role models are hard to find in the entertainment industry. Even teen sensation Miley Cyrus, known for her breakout role in Disney’s wholesome “Hannah Montana,” has been shedding her good girl image. Despite wearing her religious faith on her sleeve, Cyrus has had some controversies in the past and was recently hit with a couple more scandals. Her new music video, “Can’t Be Tamed” featured her dancing provocatively, and footage recently emerged of her grinding with a man in his forties at a party.

On this weekend's Fox News Watch, panelist Jim Pinkerton cited this NewsBusters item in which Joe Scarborough passed along the comment from an unnamed conservative insider questioning "what the hell was [Rand Paul] doing on MSNBC?", a reference to Paul's appearance on the Rachel Maddow show in which he made comments on the 1964 Civil Rights Act that have caused controversy.  The irony of course is that Scarborough is himself an MSNBC host. H/t NB reader Gat New York.

Pinkerton and his fellow News Watch panelists got a chuckle out of this NewsBuster's fond wish which concluded the item: "Oh to be an olive when Joe and Rachel sip martinis together at the MSNBC TGIF."

ABC and NBC rushed to get stories onto the air Friday night delivering left-wing talking points against the new social studies curriculum guidelines passed by the Texas State Board of Education, as both portrayed conservative Christians as the enemies of accurate history. Reality wasn’t good enough for ABC, which framed its lead story around “Rewriting History?” and saw no liberals in the “big controversy,” yet also tried to discredit the conservatives by highlighting “some of the things the conservatives tried and failed to do.”

ABC’s Dan Harris fretted “the new standards require that textbooks mention pillars of the conservative movement, like the Moral Majority the National Rifle Association, and the Contract with America with no liberal counter balance.” Harris, acting as more of a prosecutor than a journalist, then ran archived clips of him demanding from board chairman Don McLeroy:

- What do you say to people who say that you are, in essence, imposing your political and religious views on school children?

- If the Founding Fathers really wanted this to be a Christian nation, why is there no mention of Christianity or Jesus in the Constitution?

Instead of citing any other examples of awful new guidelines, Harris went to ones not added: “Here are some of the things the conservatives tried and failed to do: Have the President called by his full name, Barack Hussein Obama, which some called an attempt to raise questions about his faith, and even rename the slave trade as the Atlantic Triangular Trade.”

"Dating is difficult. In fact, many times it's so uncomfortable that you have to look for creative ways to unwind after an unsuccessful night out."

So begins NBC's synopsis for a new "romantic comedy" expected to premiere in 2011.

In "Friends With Benefits," "Ben, Sara, Hoon, Aaron and Riley are a group of close friends who do just that. After a bad date, they turn to each other for moral (and sometimes physical) support."

The synopsis continues, "Hey, what are friends for?" (preview video follows with commentary):

President Barack Obama's statement just before he signed the Freedom of the Press Act on Monday painfully avoided reality to the point of giving offense. If it became widely known, it would likely become very problematic.

Here is what the President said that was particularly offensive (bolds are mine):

And obviously the loss of Daniel Pearl was one of those moments that captured the world’s imagination because it reminded us of how valuable a free press is, and it reminded us that there are those who would go to any length in order to silence journalists around the world.

Two key administration-protecting original news disseminators picked up on the need to keep the bolded words out of their news coverage of the event. The Associated Press, which usually (i.e., almost always) quotes the president in related stories, provided no quotes in its terse five-paragraph report, the first four of which follow (for fair use and discussion purposes, of course):

Would you watch a sitcom with your kids at 8:30 PM that had the title "$#*! My Dad Says?"

The folks at CBS think you will.

In fact, they're so confident the vulgar reference won't offend viewers that the star -- and hence, the dad in the vulgar title!!! -- is none other than "Star Trek's" William Shatner.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, the Parents Television Council is threatening to challenge broadcast licenses over this issue (video of preview also follows with commentary):

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Rand Paul cancels Sunday's "Meet the Press" appearance.

After two days of bruising media coverage about his views on elements of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the campaign of Kentucky U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul tells me it has canceled the candidate's upcoming appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" -- something the show's host and producer are currently sounding the alarm about on Twitter.

Here's more on what Paul actually said Thursday. 

Thoughts? 

The 2010 World Cup opens in South Africa in a few weeks. As a sports event it is unrivaled in its popularity. It promises to bring a half-million soccer fans to that country.

But it will also draw out the worst of the worst. The Christian Science Monitor reports that the economic promise of an expected half a million largely male incoming consumers is attracting a massive influx of prostitutes from across the border in Zimbabwe. Hotel managers are guessing that as many as 40,000 ladies of the evening are assembling from as far away as Hong Kong, Pakistan, and Venezuela.

This is not the first time this unholy amalgam of sports and the sex trade has materialized. Evidence shows this to be the norm.

The last World Cup competition four years ago in Germany, where prostitution and brothels are legal and tax revenue-generating, attracted thousands of “sex workers” to exploit the crowds. It made a dirty joke out of the tournament motto “A time to make friends.”

Bill Maher invited comedian Patton Oswalt to his table on HBO's Real Time on Friday night and saluted his small film from 2009, "Big Fan," in which he plays a superfan of the New York Giants, even after a Giants linebacker beats him up severely. Maher turned this analogy to politics and leftist Thomas Frank's book "What's the Matter with Kansas?" which argued that poorer Americans are duped into voting for conservatives against their own economic interests.

"He will not go against the people who are hurting him, and it just seems so typical of the Joe the Plumbers of the world," Maher said. Oswalt replied, "It just seems to me that a lot of the people who are in the Tea Party movement and those other groups, there's been this brilliant magic trick where people are confusing capitalism with corporations, and those could not be more opposite, but they're made to root for these giant corporations as if they're rooting for free enterprise."

"My point," Maher insisted.

The man that predicted the economic and financial collapse two years ago advised people that are concerned about inflation to buy Spam rather than gold.

As you can't turn on a TV these days without seeing an ad for gold or some economist recommending you buy the precious metal, Nouriel Roubini's comment on Friday's "Real Time" deliciously went against the tide of financial advisors across the fruited plain.

"Gold has no intrinsic value," he amazingly told host Bill Maher. "If you're really worried about say inflation rising, I would buy Spam."

Roubini continued, "You know, you can eat Spam, you cannot eat gold" (video follows with transcript and commentary): 

John Fund on Friday smacked down Bill Maher for calling Tea Partiers "teabaggers."

As the panel discussion of HBO's "Real Time" convened, the host said, "The teabaggers I guess think they had a big win Tuesday."

He then asked the American Spectator's Fund, "Why are they so silent on financial reform?"  

After Fund answered the question, he said, "I think people should be called by the term that they use themselves...Using 'teabaggers' is equivalent to, I have atheist friends. They don't like to be called 'Christian haters.' They prefer to be called atheists (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): 

It would not surprise me if the Associated Press's April Castro has spent the last 10 weeks gritting her teeth non-stop.

In March (covered at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), she was clearly peeved at the Texas State Board of Education. In a supposedly objective news story entitled "Texas ed board vote reflects far-right influences," she decried a "faction" (actually a nearly two-thirds majority) of Board members for "injecting conservative ideals into social studies, history and economics lessons."

I will take that as an admission that such ideals have previously been absent or barely present.

Friday, non-appreciative April was tasked with covering the Board's final adoption vote that ratified proposed curriculum changes. If we are to believe her (I know, that's dangerous), improvements (my word, certainly not hers) in the meantime appear to have been strengthened the reality basis, if you will, of the curriculum.

Here are the first five paragraphs of Ms. Castro's report (link is dynamic and subject to change). There are lots of errors in those paragraphs alone; readers are invited to see if they can catch the big cahuna:

They say people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. But that saying didn't stop NPR's Nina Totenberg and PBS pundit Mark Shields from making fun of the sex appeal of conservative Rep. Mark Souder of Indiana, who resigned this week after admitting an affair with a female staffer.

On the local PBS talk show Inside Washington, Totenberg mentioned the abstinence video Souder made with his lover, and added "I don't know why anybody would want to not abstain with him."

Shields joined in: "Who was it? Henry Kissinger, who said 'power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.' Mark Souder is the real test of that, because a George Clooney look-alike he is not." As if Mark Shields could compare. Shields is just about to turn 73. Totenberg is 66.

A California Congressman on Thursday strongly criticized Mexican President Felipe Calderon for his comments about Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law while also excoriating "the left wing of the White House" and "many Democrats in this Congress" who cheered his remarks.

As has been widely reported, Calderon, speaking before a joint session of Congress, said, "I strongly disagree with the recently adopted law in Arizona."

This elicited a standing ovation from many Democrats present including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Attorney General Eric Holder, and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (video right).

Just a few hours later, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) took to the House floor to express his view of this disgraceful day in American history (video follows with full transcript):

Since Rand Paul has dropped out of this week's episode of "Meet the Press," Mark Levin has challenged MTP host David Gregory to appear on his syndicated radio show.

MP3 audio for download here or you can enjoy this clip from our friends at The Right Scoop:

The Associated Press's Sophia Tareen has apparently had a lot of time on her hands the past couple of days, and her wire service bosses couldn't find much for her to do. How else to explain Tareen's devotion of almost 1,000 words to the burning question of whether cartoon character Dora the Explorer is an illegal immigrant?

You read that right, but it's worse than that. Tareen claims that images of Dora "are being used by those who oppose and support Arizona's law," but could only cite actual instances of usage by leftists at the Huffington Post and at a a Facebook page whose category is "Just for Fun - Outlandish Statements."

Along the way, Tareen oh-so-predictably resurrects the late-1990s "Teletubbies are Gay" kerfuffle (incompletely, of course); waits until the 27th paragraph to tell us that the image at the top right, which "is circulating widely in the aftermath of Arizona's controversial new immigration law," has really been around since last year (originating at freakingnews.com); and quotes a "gender studies" professor at the University of Arizona who -- undisclosed to readers, naturally -- is virulently anti-capitalism.

Having appropriately forewarned everyone, here are samplings of Sophia's choice chestnuts:

In a bizarre attempt to demonstrate how vital gun control is in his city, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley threatened to stick a bayonted rifle up a reporter's rear end and pull the trigger. Of course if a Republican had done the same to demonstrate the conservative position on gun control, there would be a media bonanza. Not so for the Democratic mayor.

"If I put this up your—ha!—your butt—ha ha!—you’ll find out how effective this is!" Daley told Mick Dumke of the Chicago Reader. Dumke had posed the very sensible question of how the city's draconian restrictions on gun ownership had helped, given that firearms are still widely accessible, and used in violent crimes throughout the city.

Daley didn't seem to understand the question; he went on about how many lives the confiscation of guns saves, while ignoring the reporter's point that gun control doesn't take firearms out of the hands of criminals. Or, for that matter, politicians peeved with reporters for asking inconvenient questions (video of the exchange below the fold).

The top story at NYTimes.com Friday afternoon, presumably headed for the front-page of Saturday morning’s newspaper, touted how: “Immigration Law in Arizona Reveals G.O.P. Divisions.” All but one paragraph of the 30-paragraph report by Jennifer Steinhauer described the dilemma for Republicans torn between popular sentiment in favor of Arizona’s pro-enforcement stance, and the need to not alienate Hispanic voters.

Fair enough. But the Democrats are ostensibly in worse shape, having publicly and visibly denounced (with the President of Mexico) a popular law that 64% of Americans support, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

But the Times casts the GOP as stymied by the “delicacy of the issue,” even going so far as to seek wisdom from Karl Rove (not a Times favorite), identified with the soft-line approach that helped erode President Bush’s popularity among conservatives a few years ago:

In the "Busted" segment at the end of Friday's The Dylan Ratigan Show on MSNBC, host Dylan Ratigan went after the New York Times for "accusing" Connecticut Attorney General and Democratic Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal of distorting his military record: "We think the Times should investigate some of its investigative reporting."

Ratigan dismissed a quote the Times used of Blumenthal referring to "the days that I served in Vietnam," claiming it was "only part of the story." Ratigan argued: "A longer clip from the same speech shows Blumenthal much more accurately describing his record." That longer clip included Blumenthal vaguely stating: "I really want to add my words of thanks as someone who served in the military during the Vietnam era in the Marine Corps." Hardly a statement that would have corrected the record for the audience.

Even so, Ratigan proclaimed: "This seems to support Blumenthal's explanation that he simply misspoke during that part of the speech, and on a few other occasions cited by the Times." Ratigan went on to declare: "Also undercutting the Times, word that Blumenthal's Senate rival, Linda McMahon, yes, from pro wrestling, admits that her campaign helped with The New York Times story, including gathering that evidence."