America hasn’t recovered from the serious blows to its stature delivered by nearly a decade of policy debacles. As Obama never tires of reminding the American public…he inherited a Herculean task: the Augean-stable-size mess left behind by George W. Bush.

The August 23 & 30 two-week edition cover story package certainly reflected Obama’s policy agenda. A sidebar (apparently not online) on the nations with the best health care, which put Japan at the top, touted fourth-best Spain where “universal coverage is a constitutionally guaranteed right, and there are no out-of-pocket expenses aside from some prescription drugs.” The U.S. wasn’t even one of the top ten countries listed (the full list online has the U.S. at #26 in health, tied with the Czech Republic and Chile and behind Slovenia.)

In a two-page spread on particular bests for a bunch of nations, Newsweek’s Karen Fragala Smith, who tagged the Czech Republic as the “Best Place for Sex” and Belgium as the “Best Place to Be a Dog Owner,” declared France the “Best Place to Have a Baby,” trumpeting “low-cost health care” and nanny state services:

Maman is sitting pretty, with as much as seven months’ paid leave, low-cost health care, and a baby nurse who makes house calls. If she’s sick, the government sends someone to do the family’s laundry.

In the introductory article, Rana Foroohar explained the purpose of the exercise was to determine: “If you were born today, which country would provide you the very best opportunity to live a healthy, safe, reasonably prosperous, and upwardly mobile life?”

The skew toward big government and corporate statism nations isn’t a surprise when you see the experts the magazine relied upon:

The effort took several months, during which we received copious aid from an advisory board that included Nobel laureate and Columbia University professor Joseph E. Stiglitz; McKinsey & Co. Social Sector Office director Byron Auguste; McKinsey Global Institute director James Manyika; Jody Heymann, the founding director of McGill University’s Institute for Health and Social Policy and a professor at the university; and Geng Xiao, director of Columbia’s Global Center for East Asia.

In his accompanying piece, “We’re No. 11! America may be declining, but don’t despair,” Michael Hirsh propounded:

America hasn’t recovered from the serious blows to its stature delivered by nearly a decade of policy debacles. As Obama never tires of reminding the American public — which is listening less and less, judging by his poll ratings — he inherited a Herculean task: the Augean-stable-size mess left behind by George W. Bush. First there was the diversion of military resources and attention from Afghanistan to Iraq — a draining, misdirected war and occupation that many believe never should have been launched. Then there was the long period of fiscal, regulatory, and financial recklessness that contributed to the worst-ever downturn since the Great Depression. Finally, Washington squandered its chance to lead on climate change.

The “aughts,” The Washington Post wrote last January, were really for naught: the 2000s were “a lost decade,” the paper said, with economic output rising at its slowest rate of any decade since the 1930s and an unprecedented net job growth of zero. It’s no wonder other countries started to catch up faster.

Of course, leading or not leading on “climate change” has nothing to do with “which country would provide you the very best opportunity to live a healthy, safe, reasonably prosperous, and upwardly mobile life” – other than making it worse through higher prices and taxes.

The top 25 from Newsweek’s ranking of the “best” 100 countries (screen shot is from Tuesday’s Hannity):

1) Finland
2) Switzerland
3) Sweden
4) Australia
5) Luxembourg
6) Norway
7) Canada
Netherlands
9) Japan
10) Denmark
11) United States
12) Germany
13) New Zealand
14) United Kingdom
15) South Korea
16) France
17) Ireland
18) France
19) Belgium
20) Singapore
21) Spain
22) Israel
23) Italy
24) Slovenia
25) Czech Republic

Bottom three: Cameroon at #98, Nigeria at #99 and Burkina Faso at #100.

Where Newsweek placed the U.S. in some categories:

> #2, between Germany and France, in “Quality of Life Among Populous Nations.”

> Also #2, below Singapore and above South Korea, in “Economic Dynamism.”

In two categories featured in the magazine the U.S. didn’t make it into the ten countries listed: “Education” (Finland #1, South Korea #2, Canada #3 and even Estonia, at #7, beat the U.S.) and “Health” (Japan #1, Switzerland #2, Sweden #3, Spain #4, Italy #5).

Discussing the issue on "Fox News Sunday," the liberal FNC contributor said, "As far as the Missouri vote, you get 70 percent inside an echo chamber of older white people, no not in St. Louis not in Kansas City, saying, ‘Oh yeah, we don’t like a requirement that everybody has to have healthcare even though the hospitals in Missouri say it’s gonna drive up our costs.’"

Host Chris Wallace seemed somewhat stunned by this and asked, "What happened to respect for democracy?"

When Williams elaborated saying that he believes this will eventually be decided by the courts, Liz Cheney rightly scolded her colleague, "I think it is stunning you and the White House are unwilling to heed the votes of the people in Missouri" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

LIZ CHENEY: You’ve also got Robert Gibbs this week when asked about what does it mean that 71 percent of the people in Missouri said they don’t want any mandate for health insurance, he said, quote, "It means nothing." Now when you’ve got a White House that is that unwilling to listen to what the people out there are saying, I think that you know, it causes some real concern about whether or not they are actually going to be responsive to the voters. But, I think, frankly it gives the voters much bigger impetus come November to elect some folks who will listen to him.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Juan?

JUAN WILLIAMS: I like George W. Bush, but the decider? I think, he’s the one that coined that phrase. He said he was the decider when he was president, so I guess President Obama can be the decider now that he is president. Isn’t that the deal?

CHENEY: I don’t think Bush ever said he got to decide who had the keys to the scar.

WILLIAMS: Look, I think this is, and as far as the Missouri vote, you get 70 percent inside an echo chamber of older white people, no not in St. Louis not in Kansas City, saying, "Oh yeah, we don’t like a requirement that everybody has to have healthcare even though the hospitals in Missouri say it’s gonna drive up our costs, everyone is just going to run to the emergency rooms when they have their accidents."

WALLACE: What happened to respect for democracy?

WILLIAMS: I have tremendous respect for democracy, but as Ted Olson…

WALLACE: The proposition was on the ballot…

WILLIAMS: Yes.

WALLACE: …and 71 percent voted in favor of it.

WILLIAMS: That’s who’s energized. The unions didn’t participate and they didn’t get out there…

WALLACE: Well, that’s their problem, isn’t it?

WILLIAMS: Right, so because everybody knows, as Ted Olson told you in an earlier segment on the gay rights issue, the courts, the courts have said that federal law trumps state law in this area, or they will decide if it’s to be the case.

WALLACE: That has to do with immigration, we are talking about healthcare.

WILLIAMS: That is exactly right, Chris, on the issue, does, can a state say that we will not require our citizens to buy health insurance? That issue is right now being taken up by several attorney generals around the country in seperate states, and, they will eventually end up in the courts. I hate to inform you of this, you should know this as our anchor.

(Laughter)

CHENEY: It is a real constitutional issue whether or not the federal government has the right to force people to buy insurance, and I think it is stunning you and the White House are unwilling to heed the votes of the people in Missouri.

Isn’t it wonderful how much race is now brought into virtually every discussion about politics?

I thought Barack Obama was going to change all that.

On the other hand, if Williams and his ilk think the older white vote is irrelevant, they’re going to be tremendously surprised in November.

After all, it is indeed older white people that typically vote in off-year elections when the White House isn’t at stake.

As such, either Juan doesn’t know this – which seems impossible given his years covering politics – or he was being a tad disingenuous this fine Sunday morning.

Regardless of which, he should be rather embarrassed about his performance.

(The Missouri repudiation of a central tenet of ObamaCare came a day after another setback for ObamaCare which the newscasts also ignored: A federal district judge in Richmond rejected the Obama administration’s quest to block Virginia’s lawsuit challenging Congress’ jurisdiction to mandate individuals buy health insurance.)

“At the White House today, they sang to the President,” ABC anchor Diane Sawyer touted over a graphic which declared it Obama’s “Big Day.” Viewers were treated to one stanza of “Happy birthday to you!” before Sawyer related: “He says we’ve watched him go gray, and the photographs since the campaign do show a little speckle in that hair.”

With his wife and one daughter in Spain and the other daughter at camp, “the President [is] flying solo tonight, heading to Chicago to spend his 49th birthday as a bachelor, with only ‘First Dog’ Bo to keep him company,” NBC’s Savannah Guthrie sulked, though “Mr. Obama did get a serenade from winners of citizen medals he handed out at the White House today.”

After reciting Michelle Obama’s extravagant resort destination in Spain, Guthrie ended on a heartwarming note:

And we can report tonight that the President got two calls today. Mrs. Obama and Sasha called from Spain, and Malia, who’s on that summer camp sleep-away camp for a few weeks, gets just one call during that time at camp. She saved it for today and called her father to wish him happy birthday.

From the Wednesday night, August 4 newscasts:

ABC’s Word News:

DIANE SAWYER: At the White House today, they sang to the President.

VIDEO OF GROUP: Happy birthday to you!

SAWYER: It is his birthday. He is now 49. He says we’ve watched him go gray, and the photographs since the campaign do show a little speckle in that hair. He is going to Chicago alone tonight to dine with friends. His oldest daughter is away at summer camp. His wife and youngest daughter Sasha have traveled to a resort in Spain with a group of friends from Chicago, moms and daughters.

CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: President Obama is spending the night in his own home for a change. He flew to Chicago today to celebrate his 49th birthday, but only first dog Bo went with him. Michelle Obama and daughter Sasha are on vacation in Spain. Malia is away at camp. So the President planned a birthday dinner with friends.

NBC Nightly News:

LESTER HOLT: President Obama is in his hometown of Chicago tonight. It’s his 49th birthday, but it’s kind of an unusual one. His family is nowhere in sight. NBC News White House correspondent Savannah Guthrie is traveling with the President and joins us from the Windy City tonight. Savannah, good evening.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Good evening, Lester. Well, the President is here in Chicago for some Democratic Party fundraising and an event at a Ford plant tomorrow, but he will have a birthday dinner with friends tonight. No family around, though. Daughter Malia is at summer sleep-away camp, and the First Lady and daughter Sasha are on a lavish trip to Spain. The President flying solo tonight, heading to Chicago to spend his 49th birthday as a bachelor, with only "First Dog" Bo to keep him company. Mr. Obama did get a serenade from winners of citizen medals he handed out at the White House today. But the union group he addressed earlier in the day did not let him eat cake.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I’m a little disappointed there wasn’t a cake, though. I’m going to have to talk to the Secret Service about that.

RICHARD TRUMKA, AFL-CIO: You got to talk to those guys because they nixed the cake.

OBAMA: They’re probably eating it right now.

TRUMKA: They are.

GUTHRIE: Right now Mrs. Obama and younger daughter Sasha are a world away, on a five-day, mother-daughter vacation with a group of friends in the coastal resort town of Marbella, Spain. The family is staying at the luxury Ritz Carlton retreat Villa Padierna which features five restaurants, a spa and private beach. All the amenities expected of a five-star hotel favored by celebrities, including privacy.

KATE MAXWELL, CONDE NAST TRAVELER: So we understand the Obamas have booked 30 rooms. Suites go up to $6500 a night, so they’re looking at a pretty hefty bill at the end of the four days they’re going to spend there.

GUTHRIE: The Obamas will pay their own way, but the cost of Mrs. Obama’s traveling staff and security detail will be borne by American taxpayers. And the money she spends will boost the Spanish economy – something the White House declined to get into today.

ROBERT GIBBS: She is a private citizen and is the mother of a daughter on a private trip.

GUTHRIE: A European vacation for a First Lady is not unprecedented, nor is sniping about it.

MYRA GUTIN, FIRST LADY HISTORIAN: Jacqueline Kennedy was criticized for going to Greece and to Italy, so certainly Michelle Obama, the criticism of Michelle Obama would not be a first.

GUTHRIE: Well, the First Family also plans to spend a weekend in the Gulf Coast this month as well as spend 10 days on Martha’s Vineyard.

And we can report tonight that the President got two calls today. Mrs. Obama and Sasha called from Spain, and Malia, who’s on that summer camp sleep-away camp for a few weeks, gets just one call during that time at camp. She saved it for today and called her father to wish him happy birthday, Lester.

Did you think that, with the perspective that time tends to impart, Alan Grayson would have backed off his unhinged allegation that Republicans wanted sick people to die quickly?  Trick question! I did say Alan Grayson.  On the evening’s Ed Show, the dippy Dem congressman from Florida emphatically stated that his ugly assertion, made on the floor of the House, was "the truth."

Grayson was responding to the suggestion by Kurt Kelly–one of the seven Republicans vying for the right to knock Grayson off–that by missing a vote on an allocation of funds for our overseas military, perhaps Grayson wanted the troops to die.  Kelly was clearly riffing off Grayson’s earlier allegation.  That didn’t stop Grayson from taking great umbrage, claiming that the difference between his assertion and Kelly’s was that Kelly was lying whereas he Grayson was telling "the truth."

For awhile there, I thought that Schultz, after airing the Kelly clip, wasn’t going to mention the Grayson antecedent.  Schultz did get around to it, while embracing the slur . . .

Indeed, Schultz endorsed Grayson’s slander.  He introduced Grayson by saying that he’s "not afraid to speak truth to power, and "the truth is what this guy’s all about."  After playing the grotesque clip of Grayson on the House floor accusing Republicans of wanting the sick to "die quickly," Schultz said "I totally agreed with you when you did that."

Note: Grayson has gotten himself into hot water by spending $73,000 of taxpayer money to send a DVD to his constituents touting his first-term accomplishments.

She framed questions to Pelosi around phrases such as “from an outsider’s point of view” and “for me, looking in from outside.” Amanpour displayed less ideological affinity and was more engaged and informed about Afghanistan when she quizzed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

She provided a “power house roundtable” little different, in a key way, from the George Stephanopoulos days since George Will was out-numbered two-to-one by Donna Brazile and Paul Krugman. Amanpour’s addition: Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid, who appeared from Madrid and whom Amanpour touted as “the world authority on the Taliban.” Prompting Will’s visual disagreement, Amanpour insisted: “The Financial Times is basically saying that deficit talk is a phony rhetorical war and that actually the stimulus has had some effect. You’re shaking your head.”

The new international flavor, symbolized by a spinning globe in the bottom corner of the screen whenever names or topics are identified on screen and a world map background on set for shots that don’t show the Capitol dome, began with the opening from the announcer: “From all across our world, to the heart of our nation’s capital, ABC This Week with Christiane Amanpour starts now.”

Amanpour added an international take to the “In Memoriam” with new introductory words to the listing of soldiers and Marines killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, phraseology which put the U.S. deaths second to all the wars around the world: “We remember all of those who died in war this week. And the Pentagon released the names of eleven U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan.”

On aesthetics, the show, still produced at the Newseum, featured new, lower-key, theme music, new red-heavy on-screen graphics and a new oval table replacing a more round one. Also still in place: the post-show online PolitiFact fact-checking instituted by interim host Jake Tapper.

The “In Memoriam” and “Sunday Funnies” segments remained, but she ended with a new “Picture of This Week” segment, the first one devoted to global warming fears:

And finally this morning, our Picture of This Week. NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, released its state of the climate report this week. It concludes that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the earth has been growing warmer over the past 50 years. So we leave you with pictures from here and around the world of people cooling off from a very hot July.

(For examples of Amanpour’s liberal approach on CNN, check out the MRC’s “Profile in Bias” on her, “Christiane Amanpour: Top Ten Notable Quotes from a Liberal Career.”)

Her very first words, teasing her first show, conveyed her empathy with Pelosi and befuddlement over why voters would go another direction:

Good morning. I’m Christiane Amanpour. And at the top of the news this week: the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. She’s won big victories on health care, the stimulus, and financial reform. But is her party at risk of losing the House in November? [to Pelosi] How did this happen?

(Amanpour’s empathy toward, and admiration of, Speaker Pelosi fits in well at ABC. It matches the approach from Diane Sawyer and Charlie Gibson:

From March, after ObamaCare passed: To ‘Indefatigable’ Pelosi, Sawyer Wonders What Her Dad and Mom ‘Would Have Said About this Moment?‘ 

From January of 2007, upon becoming House Speaker: Gibson on Pelosi: ‘Taking Care of the Children and the Country‘ )

Amanpour’s opening explanation tried to answer why she took the new job. In short, she’s slumming to help bring the world to the ill-informed Americans:

Good morning. I am thrilled be here at the Newseum. After 20 years covering the world, the story in this country is turning into one of the most fascinating. The struggle over politics and policy and how they merge to meet people’s needs. And having witnessed firsthand the global challenges and opportunities that America faces every day, I’m also eager to open a window on the world and cut through those complicated issues that we all confront.

Amanpour’s questions to Pelosi, recorded in the Speaker’s U.S. Capitol office on Friday, picking up after she pressed her repeatedly on declining Democratic support for Obama’s Afghanistan policy and wondered: “Afghanistan, is it worth it? Is it worth it?” The questions:

> Let’s go to something much closer to home right now at the moment and that is the ethics conundrum with Representative Rangel. How does your affection, your respect for him as a colleague, square with what’s going on right now? And what you said and declared that this is going to be the most ethical Congress, that you’re going to drain the swamp of any kind of wrongdoing, corruption, et cetera?

> Can you see Congressman Rangel ever returning as Chairman of the Ways and Means or any position of leadership in the House?

> Let me ask you about the midterm elections. You, by all accounts, are one of the most, if not the most, powerful and successful Speakers in the history of the United States. You’ve passed so much legislation. The President was elected with a significant majority. You had control of both houses of Congress. And yet, now, people are talking about you might lose your majority in the House. The gap seems to be growing wider between what’s achieved and what’s making an impact with the people. How did this happen?

[PELOSI: Well, that's one version of the story as you pose it-]

> But from an outsider’s point of view, many people are asking that. How did you get to the place where perhaps you might lose your majority?

> Are you nervous about November?…Not at all? I know you’re putting on great face as people have to going into an election. But people say there’s considerable worry about what will happen in November.

> So what did it make you feel, then, when the President’s own spokesman said that you might lose the majority?

> Let me ask you about the tax cuts. Are you going to take that issue to a fight before the elections, letting the tax cuts for the $250,000 expire and then keep them on for the middle class?

> There’s so much polarization, so much partisanship, not just amongst the politicians but in the press, amongst the people. You’ve talked a little about what’s, you know, us and them in your view. I want to show you this which is a Republican commercial.

[Video of RightChange.com ad: Pelosi has grown into a power-hungry goliath. Defying the will of the American people. Who has the power to stop her? Who can save America?]

> What do you think about that, you being the bogeyman?

> For me, looking in from outside, it just seems there seems to be a never-ending partisanship. What is it you can do for the people in this highly-polarized situation?

A few of her more challenging/contrarian questions to Gates:

> So many people are arranging their schedules for 2011. The summer of 2011. My question to you is this. What can General Petraeus do to defeat the Taliban at their own game? What can he do now in Afghanistan to avoid the deadline they’re setting for themselves?

> What I think a lot of people maybe don’t get is that the Afghan people still want the American forces there. In the latest ABC poll shows that 68 percent of the Afghan people actually want the American forces still there. Do you think that there has been an opportunity missed or should there be an opportunity seized by yourself, maybe by the President, to go out and speak to the American people more about Afghanistan, about strategy, about why it’s important?

> Final question. Do you think the way out is to strike a deal with the Taliban?

Americans continue to be more likely to disapprove than approve of President Obama’s sweeping health care reforms, a new CBS News poll shows. While approval of the law is slightly higher than it was when the reforms were signed into law in March, support for the measure has dropped seven points in the past two months.

Forty-nine percent of Americans now disapprove of the health care reform measure, according to the poll, which was conducted July 9-12. Thirty-six percent support the law.

Americans continue to see little personal benefit from the health care reform legislation. By more than two to one, Americans think it will hurt (33 percent) rather than help them (13 percent). Forty-eight percent expect the reform to have no effect on them personally.

The Early Show reported poll results on Tuesday and Wednesday morning, but not about health care. On Tuesday’s Evening News, reporter Dean Reynolds found a grumpy public (and tried to explain away their disapproval): 　

KATIE COURIC: As this crisis in the Gulf enters a 13th week, a CBS News poll out tonight finds more than half of Americans disapprove of how President Obama is handling it and his overall job approval rating is down three points, tying his all-time low of 44 percent. National correspondent Dean Reynolds is in Chicago tonight and, Dean, this seems to be the summer of our discontent.

DEAN REYNOLDS: Boy, it seems that way, Katie. Pessimism just permeate this survey, along with a gathering sense that the man in charge is not doing enough to alleviate it…Indeed, in our new CBS News poll, the economy is seen as the biggest problem facing the country by far and specifically the lack of jobs.

WALTER POWELL, CALIFORNIA RESIDENT: A job period! A job, you know? Most people they can`t get jobs.

REYNOLDS: 52 percent say the president has spent too little time addressing the issue and 63 percent say his economic programs have had no effect on them personally. That’s politically ominous for Obama and probably frustrating given that a number of independent economic research organizations say at least 2 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus. And yet 75 percent of the country believes the effects of the recession will last two more years or longer.

On screen, the economic research organizations said to claim 2.3 million jobs saved or created are Moody’s economy.com and IHS Global Insight. But Reynolds is overstating those groups’ estimates, according to PolitiFact:

Separately, the council’s report cited four independent analyses of the same question. These estimates were by the Congressional Budget Office, Congress’ nonpartisan number-crunching arm, as well by three private-sector economic-analysis firms. Here’s what those groups found:

– CBO: Between 800,000 jobs (low estimate) and 2.4 million jobs (high estimate) saved or created.

– IHS/Global Insight: 1.25 million jobs saved or created.

– Macroeconomic Advisers: 1.06 million jobs saved or created.

– Moody’s economy.com: 1.59 million jobs saved or created.

In the report, Obama’s economic advisers argue that their estimates "are consistent with a broad consensus of numerous professional forecasters. The fact that such a range of public and private forecasters broadly agree with our assessment should increase confidence that the act is having a substantial stimulative effect."

But focusing on the 2 million figure, as Obama does, is a somewhat generous view of the data.

CBS seems to share that "generosity" with the estimates. 

So you want to crawl under a high-powered lamp and bake your skin so that it has a brownish-orangish glow to it, even though there are potential health consequences. Well, the federal government is here to save you and, according to "CBS Evening News," that’s not a bad thing.

The new federal 10 percent tax on indoor tanning has provoked odd alliances – such as when Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told "Snooki" from MTV’s "Jersey Shore" through Twitter he would "never tax your tanning bed." But on the June 30 broadcast of "Evening News," CBS correspondent Michelle Miller made the case why the government should.

"Gisselle Colon wanted to be bronze and beautiful. She sunbathed and bought a membership to a tanning salon several years ago. Last month, things turned ugly," Miller said. "This is her scar. In May, Gisselle was diagnosed with melanoma, one of the deadliest and most preventable forms of cancer." (h/t @KenShepherd)

And according to Miller, guess what – exposure to large doses of UVA radiation increases the likelihood you’ll wind up with skin problems.

"An estimated 30 million Americans use tanning beds every year – 2.3 million are teenagers. It costs about $17 a visit. A 10 percent tax will raise that price by $1.70," Miller continued. "It’s unclear whether that will be enough to discourage indoor tanners. What is clear, new research finds indoor tanning before the age of 35 increases the risk of melanoma by 75 percent. Why? Tanning booths emit those UVA and UVB radiation. UVA causes the burns, UVB the tan. Booths emit mostly UVA, but it can be at doses 12 times stronger than the sun."

This tax will hurt small business owners, according to theNational Federation of Independent Business. The NFIB says approximately 19,000 "mom and pop" small businesses could be affected by this tax and those businesses will likely spend an average of more than $74 an hour to comply with federal tax paperwork burdens.

"The first present we get under this new health care law takes effect this week – and that is the tanning tax," Karen Harned of the NFIB said at The Heritage Foundation’s Bloggers Briefing on June 30.

But this didn’t stop Miller from making the obligatory case for the tanning salon regulation, or even a ban.

"New public service announcements take aim at teen tanning," she said. "So too, are lawmakers. Thirty-two states now restrict it, for example, by requiring parental permission in person. And New York State is considering banning indoor tanning outright for anyone under 18."

Before joining the Obama campaign as senior strategist and senior campaign spokesperson on the road, Douglass toiled for National Journal, part of Atlantic Media which also owns The Hotline. Her first stint in the new administration was as Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, followed by Communications Director for the White House’s Health Reform Office, a slot she left in April.

Atlantic Chairman David Bradley recognizes the conflict between her political agenda and being a journalist, but he told Kurtz “she’s too big an editorial talent for us to keep her out of the editorial product.”

From Kurtz’s June 10 post:

While her political tenure “troubles me not at all” for the corporate part of the job, Bradley says, he sees a “blinking red light” when she gets involved with the journalistic side, especially as it involves the president or health care. But, adds Bradley, “she’s too big an editorial talent for us to keep her out of the editorial product.”

Douglass, who left the ABC News Washington bureau in 2006 after spending much of the 1990s with CBS News, will advance the opinions of, amongst others, Andrew Sullivan, author of The Atlantic’s “The Daily Dish” blog. On last Friday’s Real time with Bill Maher, Sullivan applauded author Joe McGinniss for renting the house next to Sarah Palin’s, proclaiming he’s just trying “to find out who this farce and phony actually is.”

> From April: “Her ObamaCare Mission Achieved, ABC/CBS Veteran Linda Douglass Departs White House.”

> My complete list of Obama-news media revolvers, updated just a few days ago, which now stands at 15.

One of those reporters was The Washington Post’s health care reporter Ceci Connolly, who last summer appeared on MSNBC and made such a plea. And since then, she made other gestures to show she was in line with the Obama administration on this issue. Well, lo and behold, according to a story by Jeremy Peters posted on the New York Times Media Decoder blog, Connolly canceled an appearance at a party for the book, "Landmark: The Inside Story of America’s New Health Care Law and What it Means for All of Us," which according to her Web site Connolly and her book are labeled as "one of the main authors of the first definitive book on the 2010 health care law."

"[T]he Post found itself in another potentially embarrassing and ethically compromised position on Wednesday after one of its most senior reporters abruptly canceled an appearance at her own book party, which was being sponsored by a public relations firm with strong ties to the Democratic Party," Peters wrote.

That communications firm was Blue Line Strategic Communications, a public relations firm run by Michael Meehan and David DiMartino. Peters reported Meehan, a Democratic communications strategist, has had some very close ties to several Democrat campaigns.

"Mr. Meehan was most recently an adviser to Martha Coakley, the Massachusetts attorney general who lost to Senator Scott Brown, the insurgent Republican candidate who captured Edward M. Kennedy’s former seat," Peters wrote. "He was also a senior staff member in the Senate for years, working for some of the most powerful members, including John Kerry, Tom Daschle and Barbara Boxer."

Connolly’s questionable association with Blue Line Strategic Communications comes on the heels of abandoned plans by the Post’s publisher Katharine Weymouth to charge lobbyists and trade groups thousands of dollars for access "to top congressional and administration officials for $25,000 a plate" at a dinner party at her home.

According to Peters, the book party went on with Connolly. However it does further beg the question if the Post’s reporting throughout the ObamaCare debate was really "objective."

The senior editor of the liberal online publication Mediaite asked an astonishingly absurd question in a headline Tuesday:

"Does The BP Oil Spill Mark The Death Of The Tea Party Movement?"

Glynnis MacNicol’s premise in her piece by that name: "The call for less government intervention into the lives of ‘regular’ citizens that was so prevalent throughout last summer, and fall, and winter has gone nearly silent in the face of the Gulf disaster."

MacNicol’s supporting evidence of the Tea Party’s demise:

After months of non-stop Tea Party coverage, and endless speculation that the movement spelled certain doom for both Washington incumbents and possibly the Obama administration, it feels like talk of the Partiers has all but disappeared off the cable newser map. [...]

During the month of April, before the oil spill took place, the phrase "tea party" was mentioned nearly 3,000 times on cable television. This past month, as the oil spill has increasingly dominated headlines, that number dropped to 471. That’s a precipitous drop considering how the movement managed to sustain its national headline prominence throughout the preceding months (the numbers are equally high Jan-March) and interesting coincides almost exactly with the BP oil spill gaining national attention.

Add it all up and MacNicol believes that since conservatives have been asking for the Obama administration to actually DO something about the oil spill, the Tea Party’s call for smaller government is now out of favor on the right.

Let me offer an alternative likely far more logical explanation for why this movement has been out of the headlines the last six weeks or so.

The first quarter of 2010 began with Scott Brown winning Ted Kennedy’s vacated Senate seat on January 19. In the subsequent weeks, media outlets focused a great deal of attention on the Tea Party and its possible impact on the November elections. 

By February, the big news story was the debate surrounding healthcare reform. As the Tea Party represented a huge force in the public discussion concerning this issue, the actions of its leaders and members were regularly reported.

Let’s not forget all the coverage this movement got as a result of the as yet unproven racist and homophobic remarks supposedly made at a protest on Capitol Hill shortly before the final bill passed the House on March 21. This also acted to keep this movement in the headlines.

After that, the Tea Party geared up for huge rallies across the country to be held on April 15 which garnered additional news coverage.

Exactly eight days later, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed her state’s anti-illegal immigration law. With Tax Day and ObamaCare now in the rearview mirror, America’s press went apoplectic.

Or course, two days prior, the oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico beginning an environmental disaster that has yet to be rectified.

Is it any wonder that the confluence of Arizona’s SB 1070 and the largest American oil spill in history have knocked the Tea Party out of the headlines?

Does the reduction in attention to this movement given these two HUGE news events in any way suggest its death?

Someone cue Mark Twain.