|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Insider Report: Hannity to Explode Hillary Clinton Book Special From NewsMax's Most Informed Sources Headlines (Scroll down for complete stories):
Story Continues Below 1. Sean Hannity to Explode Hillary Clinton Book NewsMax has learned that Edward Klein, the author of the controversial new book about Hillary Clinton will break his silence this Tuesday in exclusive interviews with Sean Hannity. The highly anticipated book that has outraged Hillary Clinton and her closest friends will be officially released that day. Klein's first interview will be on Hannity's nationally syndicated ABC Radio Network show - heard over 400 stations. Later Tuesday night, Klein will again be interviewed by Hannity on Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes" program. Expect fireworks from Hillary friend and Hannity co-host Alan Colmes. The book is so hot it has already created an apparent rift at the Fox News Channel. Bill O'Reilly, the network's highest-rated host has lambasted the book, announcing on his "Factor" program he won't cover a salacious book about Hillary - and likened it to his ban on Kitty Kelley's tell-all biography of George Bush and the Bush family. The book may prove worrisome for Senator Clinton, who has apparent ambitions to run for president in 2008. Previous reports suggest the critical account by Klein could be fatal to her aspirations. A Clinton aide said it was "full of blatant and vicious fabrications." A vexing problem for the Clinton camp is Klein himself. He is anything but a right-wing hatchet man. He's the former editor in chief of The New York Times Magazine, former foreign editor of Newsweek and author of several best sellers, including "The Kennedy Curse" and "Farewell, Jackie." Editor's Note:
2. Fox's Ailes Takes on Newsweek's Alter The gloves are off at the Fox News Channel - and Fox boss Roger Ailes is taking a swing at Newsweek. The media war began when Newsweek columnist Jonathan Alter wrote that during the Watergate scandal, Ailes would have banned the word "Watergate" on the air and instead used the pro-Nixon "Assault on the Presidency." The folks at Fox "saw nothing but sour grapes. Alter, it seems, had once sought a job from Ailes, but ended up working for rival MSNBC," according to Paul Bedard's column in U.S. News & World Report. After he found out about the Fox reaction, Alter went on Arianna Huffington's blog and took another jab at Ailes: "Mr. Dish It Out apparently can't take it." He also noted that Ailes, when writing op-ed pieces about Republicans, doesn't point out that he once worked for President Nixon. Ailes countered with a letter to Alter that he made public. "I was disappointed by your recent cheap shot about me in Newsweek," Ailes wrote. "In nine years of the Fox News Channel, I've never banned any word, phrase or story." He also said that when he worked for Nixon, he was a 28-year-old television producer with no editorial control. Then, apparently referring to media scandals such as Newsweek's retraction of its story about U.S. troops abusing the Quran, Ailes sought to deliver the knockout blow: "The Fox New Channel didn't report something that just got people killed, nor have we fired our executive editor, our top producers, our anchors, and we don't have a former attorney general investigating our journalism."
3. Arizona Republicans Seek Censure for Sen. McCain John McCain won in a landslide when he was re-elected last year and is considered a front-runner in the 2008 presidential race, but fellow Republicans in Arizona aren't all that happy with their senator. Members of the Arizona Republican Assembly unanimously passed a resolution calling on party leaders to censure McCain for bucking conservative Republican positions on three key issues. "Every once and again we all need to be reminded of why we are where we are, who sent us there and what our responsibilities are," resolution author Bruce Barton, an elected precinct committeeman from Safford, told NewsMax. "Senator McCain has been, in Navy parlance, derelict of duty in terms of Arizona." The resolution cites McCain's stance on three issues: immigration, judicial nominations and campaign finance reform. On immigration, it said McCain is sponsoring, "together with his Democrat soul-mate, Senator Teddy Kennedy, a bill promoting amnesty for illegal aliens and for their employers, thus ignoring the opinions of his constituents." The resolution states that McCain "deserted the ranks of the Republican Party and the leadership of the U.S. Senate on the issue of limiting the filibuster of judicial nominations … thus stalling the president's agenda for judicial reform." And it said that McCain "led" the Democratic Party in "reforming" campaign finance, "providing a clear usurpation of 1st Amendment free speech rights." Said Barton: "We are not seeking to recall Senator McCain. We are not seeking his removal from the Republican Party. Certainly there's room for all points of view in the party. "This is simply a censure, a disapproval of Senator McCain's actions. You stand as one and you don't break ranks on your fellow troops." Another member of the Arizona Republican Assembly, Louis Stradling of Mesa, had hoped the resolution would actually accuse McCain of malfeasance in office. He told NewsMax that McCain's views on immigration are counter to the federal government's essential role in protecting the country from invasion, and added that he would vote for a qualified Democrat rather than McCain. The resolution will be sent to the Arizona Republican Party and asks chairman Matt Salmon and other party leaders to "officially and publicly express their displeasure with Senator McCain by means of a public censure." Assembly President Barbara Blewster told NewsMax she hoped party officials would "hold McCain's feet to the fire."
4. Nancy Reagan Behind Congress's Stem Cell Surprise? Observers who were surprised that so many California Republicans Congressmen bucked President Bush and voted for a stem cell research bill might find an answer in Nancy Reagan - who called the state's congressional delegation to lobby for passage. The House voted 238 to 194 in favor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, and nearly half of California's Republican representatives - nine out of 20 - supported the bill, compared to barely one in five Republicans nationwide. President Bush opposes the bill, which loosens restrictions on federal funding of the research, and has vowed to use his veto for the first time if it passes both houses of Congress. California Republican Dana Rohrabacher confirmed that Nancy Reagan had called him and several other members of the state's GOP delegation before the May 24 vote, including Rep. Ken Calvert, who voted in favor of the bill. Rep. David Drier was undecided until a few days before the vote, and then got a call from the former first lady, according to the publication The Hill. Drier voted for the bill, as did the vast majority of Democrats - including all those from California. Reagan has supported embryonic stem cell research in the hope it could provide a cure for Alzheimer's, the disease that took her husband Ronald Reagan's life. Another factor that likely contributed to GOP support for the bill was last year's passage of Proposition 71, which devotes $3 billion to stem cell research over the next decade. The bill, which was backed strongly by voters, authorizes the sale of about $300 million in bonds annually to finance research. Since 2002, when the state first passed a bill promoting embryonic steam cell research, biotechnology companies and research institutes have been migrating to California, The Hill reports. But Republican congresswoman Mary Bono, one of the new stem cell bill's co-sponsors, said her state wouldn't benefit from federal funding of stem cell research: "If anything, one could argue that California stood to lose money by broadening research elsewhere." A White House policy document distributed to lawmakers said the legislation "would compel all American taxpayers to pay for research that relies on the intentional destruction of human embryos for the derivation of stem cells, overturning the president's policy that supports research without promoting such ongoing destruction." Editor's Note:
5. Doctors Endanger Patients with Unnecessary Tests More than nine out of 10 doctors surveyed admit that they practice some form of "defensive medicine" - ordering unnecessary tests or jettisoning potentially troublesome patients to head off malpractice lawsuits. The survey of 824 Pennsylvania physicians in six high-risk specialty practices, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), found:
"Defensive medicine is part of the social cost of a medical malpractice crisis," according to the researchers who conducted the survey. "Ordering costly imaging studies seems merely wasteful, but other defensive behaviors may reduce access to care and even pose risks of physical harm to patients." A second study published in JAMA found that states enacting malpractice reforms, particularly caps on damages in lawsuits, showed a larger increase in the number of physicians than those states not enacting reforms. "It is clear that both physicians and patients are victims of a seriously flawed malpractice system," Dr. William M. Sage, a law professor at Columbia University and director of the Pew Charitable Trusts' Project on Medical Liability in Pennsylvania, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. According to JAMA, efforts to reduce defensive medicine should include educating patients and doctors regarding appropriate care in situations that often prompt defensive medicine, developing guidelines that target common defensive practices, and reducing the financial vulnerability of doctors in high-risk specialties. This news should come as no surprise to NewsMax readers. Dr. Russell Blaylock, who authors "The Blaylock Wellness Report," wrote that doctors often conduct unnecessary tests on their patients. Worst, vital tests that can determine heart attack or stroke risk are never mentioned and never given. Editor's Note:
6. Dick Morris: Sen. Robert Byrd Vulnerable Senator Robert Byrd could be defeated in his bid for what political pundit Dick Morris calls his "umpteenth" term in the Senate. The West Virginia Democrat, who's 87, is up for re-election in 2006. And Byrd, who has never failed to get 59 percent of the vote in his previous eight Senate elections, is barely ahead of Republican Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, 46 to 43 percent, according to a recent poll by RMS Strategies. West Virginia voted for George Bush by 56 to 43 percent last year, and 52 to 46 percent in 2000, and "voters who back the GOP nationally are getting less and less forgiving of their Democratic representatives and senators in Congress," Morris writes in the publication The Hill. He points out that if every state elected senators from the same party as the presidential candidate they supported, the Senate would realign 62 to 38 in favor of the Republicans, and 16 Democrats and nine Republicans would lose their seats. But excluding swing states narrowly won by Bush or Kerry in 2004, there are 11 Democratic Senators from states Bush carried easily and only three Republicans from solidly Democratic states. The Democrats who represent red states are Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Evan Bayh of Indiana, Max Baucus of Montana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia - and Byrd. "These senators had better start splitting their ticket and stop toeing the party line if they expect their voters to do likewise," Morris writes. "The lesson of Tom Daschle in South Dakota in 2004 should be written large enough for all to see." More: Dick Morris Says its "Hillary vs. Condi" in 2008 - read his report. Go Here Now.
Editor's Notes:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2008 NewsMax.Com |