Permanent link to MTA daily media news

Is Pentagon using Guantanamo trials to influence election?
The Navy lawyer for Osama bin Laden’s driver has accused senior Pentagon officials of orchestrating war crimes prosecutions of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to influence the outcome of the 2008 presidential campaign.
I’ve told you.  I’m telling you now.  And I will continue to tell you.  BUSH WILL USE EVERY FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT TO MAKE SURE MCCAIN IS ELECTED IN NOVEMBER.  We had better be ready.  We had better factor that knowledge into our decision on a Democratic nominee.  As you know, I think Hillary Clinton is the better candidate to counter these blatant uses of government entities for political gain.

Presidential Primary Polls Conflict: Pick the One You Like? (by D. Cupples at Buck Naked Politics)
Over the last couple days, media reporting of a Pew poll’s results simultaneously upset some Clinton supporters and excited some Obama supporters. I’m not sure why. Before significant presidential Democratic primaries this year (e.g., California, Iowa, New Hampshire and Texas), different polls showed different results.  The upshot: some of those polls necessarily turned out wrong — we just didn’t know which ones were wrong until after those elections took place.  Recent  nationwide polls are similarly conflicting.

Obama’s Strategy for the Nomination (by PlainWordsat MyDD)
I’ve been watching the Obama campaign and I think I’ve nailed down the 10-point strategy he is using to get the nomination.

1. Give one great speech in an ultra-liberal precinct in your state when you have nothing to risk and then vote the same as the Senator you oppose, who came from the state that was attacked on 9/11 and supported the resolution to force inspectors back into Iraq to find out the truth.  Then when you do have something to risk, say that you pretty much agree with Bush on the war.

2.  Vote Present whenever there could be some risk in standing on principle.

3.  Take credit after the fact for other people’s legislation, while explaining at the same time that you didn’t have time to do anything because you were running for President.

4.  Put all your efforts into caucuses where few people can vote and volunteers can steer the results your way.

5.  Dismiss all the big primaries in critical states that you lose as unimportant and not representative.

6.  Block democratic votes in important states that you lost by arguing that we should stick to the rules, even though those rules were made by people with an astonishing lack of foresight.

7.  Block superdelegate votes that could go against you by arguing that we should throw away the rules because allowing superdelegates to vote their conscience would be undemocratic.

8.  Call the other candidate an ambitious monster lying racist cheater who takes credit for things she didn’t do, and belittle people who vote for her as Archie Bunkers, while making speeches saying you will unite America.

9.  Buddy up with the Reverend Wright- God- Damn- America- and- all- white- people- and- Italians- who- killed- black- Jesus and, just for good measure, call your grandmother a “typical white person.”  Then make another great speech about how this is necessary to unite America.

10.  To avoid another loss in another critical big state, which would make you the loser in every one except the one you live in, demand that your opponent get out of the race now.
My only quibble is with the wording of #1.  Obama’s 2002 speech on the war wasn’t as anti-war as he wants us to believe.  In fact, he never said directly, do not attack Iraq.

Rove’s Compromise for Democrats (By Taegan Goddard at Political Insider, CQ Politics, thanks to Beltway Dem at MyDD)
From his new perch as Fox News political pundit, Karl Rove explained how Sen. Barack Obama might deal with the problem of seating delegates from Florida and Michigan at the Democratic convention — and win the Democratic nomination at the same time.
Rove suggested that by agreeing to seat the delegates according to the results of the “illegal” January primaries — even if that would give a slight advantage to Sen. Hillary Clinton — Obama could actually persuade a majority of the remaining superdelegates to back him. It would show Democratic leaders that he’s willing to put the party’s interests above his own. It would show confidence in his own ability as a leader. And, perhaps most importantly, it would be a gesture that Clinton could not match.
If it depends on a magnanimous gesture from Barack Obama, it ain’t gonna happen.

We Are One People [except for Michigan and Florida] (video)

Al Gore stays clear of Democrat spat (New York Daily News)
The uber-arbiter is withholding judgment. Democratic icon Al Gore said he won’t step in as broker or peacemaker in the venomous nomination battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. “I think it’s going to resolve itself. But we’ll see,” Gore told The Associated Press, referring to the possibility of one candidate dropping out before the party convention in August. Viewed by some as one of the few influential high priests of the party, Gore doesn’t even have plans to make an endorsement – let alone play the role of referee. Gore dismissed party worrywarts who say the Democratic infighting only helps Republican John McCain.
Good for President Gore!  He’s the true statesman in all this.

Why Edwards is Still on the Fence (Political Wire)
New York magazine looks at why, nearly two months after dropping out of the presidential race, John Edwards still hasn’t endorsed either Sen. Barack Obama or Sen. Hillary Clinton. “According to a Democratic strategist unaligned with any campaign but with knowledge of the situation gleaned from all three camps, the answer is simple: Obama blew it. Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards’s imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat. Clinton, by contrast, engaged Edwards in a lengthy policy discussion. Her affect was solicitous and respectful. When Clinton met Edwards face-to-face in North Carolina ten days later, her approach continued to impress; she even made headway with Elizabeth. Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton’s plan (and by extension Edwards’s) for its insurance mandate.”
Edwards still doesn’t support Clinton, according to the article, because he thinks she’s too tied to lobbyists.

Long primary; Blessing or curse? (by jarhead5536 at MyDD)
Paul Begala appeared on CNN earlier this week and was asked about the damage the long primary was doing, and his answer was remarkable because of what he didn’t say.  To paraphrase – We are seeing record breaking numbers of new Democratic party voter registrations, and party organization being built up where none existed before.  Having this party apparatus and hordes of new voters in place come November will mitigate any advantage McCain has had by being allowed to sit in the cheap seats eating popcorn…  He … said that Hillary is committed to the race until all the votes are counted, which means at least through Puerto Rico.  That means contested primaries all the way to the end, which means party building in all those late states that have never bothered to do so before.

CNN LARRY KING LIVE Aired March 27, 2008 – 21:00   ET
CARVILLE: [Bill Richardson] made misrepresentations. He told people that he was going to endorse Senator Clinton, that he couldn’t endorse someone else, and then at the same time apparently he was — he was doing something else, and people are justifiably and understandably furious about this. And by the way, I have never attacked any other supporter of Senator Obama. Many of them are dear friends of mine. Some of them are some of my best friends. I thought that this was an exceptional case that merited special consideration.

Last Round: Rendell Gets a Call From Obama (by SusanUnPC at No Quarter)
Here’s what Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell [a Clinton endorser] told CNN’s Larry King about the call he got from Barack Obama: “RENDELL: I had a call from Senator Obama and he said, you know I’m going to be the nominee, and I didn’t argue with him, I said, sure, and he said I just want to make sure nothing happens in Pennsylvania, the campaign here, that will make it harder for us to win in the fall. And I said, senator, don’t even worry about that for five seconds.”

Take Your Boobs and Go Home (by Melissa McEwan at Shakespeare’s Sister, thanks to No Quarter)
Shorter Nicholas Kristof: Hillary’s a bitch, and she only has a right to stay in the campaign if she behaves like a good girl. Also, the Clintons are an amorphous two-headed beast who are barely Democrats. There is a fair argument to be made about the wisdom of a protracted primary battle if it continues to be as bloody as it has been (though I’m not sure how many people outside the blogosphere and punditry actually view it as all that bloody). But that argument can be made without pretending the Clinton campaign is the only one playing hardball, and it can be made without talking about the Clintons—who, despite one’s opinion of them, have raised shitloads of cash and garnered lots of international goodwill on behalf of the Democratic Party—like they’re unwelcome interlopers in the party… Actually, Mr. Kristof, she has every right no matter what kind of campaign she runs. That’s an American right, and it is operable for men and uppity bitches.

WWTSBQ Watch – Patrick Leahy Edition (by FrenchDoc at Corrente)
Via MSNBC, “High profile Obama backer, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), told Vermont Public Radio that he thinks Clinton should drop out and back Obama. ‘There is no way that Senator Clinton is going to win enough delegates to get the nomination,’ Leahy said. ‘She ought to withdraw and she ought to be backing Senator Obama. Now, obviously that’s a decision that only she can make. Frankly I feel that she would have a tremendous career in the Senate.’” It’s a trifecta! The WWTSBQ (Why Won’t That Stupid Bitch Quit) meme, the math meme and the divisiveness meme! Hey, Patrick Leahy, why aren’t you doing your job in the senate prosecuting the crimes of the Bush administration instead of spewing BS! Gosh I’m so tired of this.
Seems to me that the divisiveness is coming from the people who are trying to drive Clinton out of the race.  They’re being undemocratic, too.  And anti-Democratic, as well.  Go to Senator Leahy’s website and tell him what you think about his outrageous behavior.

My message to Leahy: How dare you, sir?  When you tell Senator Clinton to quit her race for the nomination, you are telling half of the party to just shut up and go home.  You are helping to divide this party.  And if you continue to do so, half of us just may MOVE ON to form another party.

Hillary’s repugnant agenda (by vastleft at Corrente)
HRC: “There are millions of reasons to continue this race: people in Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina, and all of the contests yet to come,” Clinton told reporters Friday. “This is a very close race and clearly I believe strongly that everyone should have their voices heard and their votes counted.” What does she think this is, a democracy!? The campaign is over when Kos says it’s over.

Clinton: In the race for the long run (AP)
If Hillary Rodham Clinton is feeling heat from pundits and party elders to quit the race and back Barack Obama, you’d never know it from her crowds, energy level and upbeat demeanor on the campaign trail… Traveling across Indiana, the former first lady was greeted by large, enthusiastic audiences who roared their approval at her proposals to help fix the state’s economic challenges. At events here and in North Carolina on Thursday, Clinton raised the issue of whether she should quit the race, only to have it firmly batted down by her supporters. “There are some people who are saying, you know, we really ought to end this primary, we just ought to shut it down,” she said in Mishawaka, Ind., drawing cries of “No, no!” inside a packed gymnasium. In Hammond, she compared the state’s struggling steel industry to her own efforts to fight the odds.
Your campaign to make her quit has backfired, Obamalites!

Obama says Clinton should stay in White House race
JOHNSTOWN, Pennsylvania (AFP) – Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama rejected calls for rival Hillary Clinton to get out of the race Saturday, as her camp insisted the contest was still wide open.

TPM Comes Clean: Accepts Its Partisan Obama Site Status (By Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft)
Doing a mashup attack video used to be something reserved for Republicans from Josh Marshall’s Talking Points Memo. By doing an attack video on Hillary Clinton, TPM demonstrates that not only has it become an Obama site, it is one of the most virulent and unfair of such sites. The honesty is good. After all, like Nancy Pelosi, we all knew this. What was lacking was the candor to admit it. With his latest tactics, Marshall has ostensibly admitted what we all knew anyway. Pelosi should follow suit. Now if only NBC will admit the same.

The media proved Bill Clinton right (by Jamison Foser, Media Matters)
Speaking in North Carolina [Friday a week ago], Bill Clinton talked about a potential general election matchup between Hillary Clinton and John McCain… Clinton’s comments were quite clear: The former president simply said that his wife is the best candidate on the issues, and that it would be “a great thing” to have an election about those issues rather than one about “all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.”… If, as seems obvious, Clinton was tweaking the news media for focusing on trivia and nonsensical phony controversies rather than on important issues, many journalists quickly — and unwittingly — proved his point. MSNBC’s Alex Witt, for example, described Clinton as having “raised the issue of patriotism” in his comments.
Click through for more outrageous interpretations of Clinton’s comments as well as the text and video of what he actually said.

Matt Davies

Campaign manager Williams has helped Clinton rebound (McClatchy Newspapers )
WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton trails Barack Obama in votes, delegates and fundraising, but she’s far better off than she was a month ago, when her campaign was staggering amid calls for her to exit the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Instead, she started winning again. One major difference: Maggie Williams. Democratic insiders say that Williams, who replaced Patti Solis Doyle as campaign manager in mid-February, has tamed the internal bickering that had plagued the Clinton camp.

Why Hillary Should be President (WHSBP) – Untold Stories (by FrenchDoc at Corrente)
This series outlines issues on which Hillary Clinton was ahead of the curve, starting with microcredit…  Bill and Hillary Clinton [started meeting in 1985 with people who had worked on the microcredit project in Bangladesh,] to design the plans for a bank that would provide microloans to the poor in Arkansas… [The group put] together what is now the Southern Good Faith Fund, developed in partnership with South Shore Bank (check out their website if you are interested in socially responsible investments)… [T]his is what I care about when I think of experience in a presidential candidate. I want someone who is intellectual smart and curious (even if the cool kids, the Village elders and now the Big Boyz Bloggerz think it’s soooo 90s). I want someone with a clear pulse on our global world and has the wherewithal to get in touch with the right people to get things done in a decisive fashion… Let’s look at what really matters: she caught on the idea when it was new, in the mid-1980s and no one was really paying attention. She committed to it and still promotes it.

Loans and Leadership (by Paul Krugman)
All in all, the candidates’ positions on the mortgage crisis tell the same tale as their positions on health care: a tale that is seriously at odds with the way they’re often portrayed. Mr. McCain, we’re told, is a straight-talking maverick. But on domestic policy, he offers neither straight talk nor originality; instead, he panders shamelessly to right-wing ideologues. Mrs. Clinton, we’re assured by sources right and left, tortures puppies and eats babies. But her policy proposals continue to be surprisingly bold and progressive. Finally, Mr. Obama is widely portrayed, not least by himself, as a transformational figure who will usher in a new era. But his actual policy proposals, though liberal, tend to be cautious and relatively orthodox. Do these policy comparisons really tell us what each candidate would be like as president? Not necessarily — but they’re the best guide we have.
Click here to contribute to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Obama aligns foreign policy with GOP (AP)
GREENSBURG, Pa. – Sen. Barack Obama said Friday he would return the country to the more “traditional” foreign policy efforts of past presidents, such as George H.W. Bush, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.

Obama Tries to Mislead Voters About the Energy Bill and Big Oil (by John Wesley Hardin was a Friend to the Poor at MyDD)
Picking on the energy industry is a standard part of Obama’s stump speech, where he harshly criticizes the 2005 energy bill and the Vice President Dick Cheney’s efforts in passing it. “’Exxon Mobil reported more than $10 billion in quarterly profits,’ Obama told a town hall in Greenburg, Pa. today. And then referring to Cheney, he added, ‘He met with the oil and gas companies 40 times. So is it any wonder than that the energy laws that were written were good for Exxon-Mobil but they are not good for you?’” The Problem…in 2005, Sen. Obama voted for the very same Dick Cheney energy bill, written in secret with the oil industry… Factheck via the pittsburghchannel.com: “It is true that President George W. Bush and Cheney supported the bill. It’s also true that Clinton opposed it and Obama voted for it.”

Why was Mrs. Obama worth $122k? (by Steve Sailer—yes, he’s a conservative, so shoot me)
Shortly after her husband was sworn in as a U.S. Senator, Michelle Obama famously received a raise from the U. of Chicago Hospitals from $122k to $317k for doing whatever it was she did for them. But why was she getting paid $122k by the giant hospital in the first place? An answer may have emerged in an NYT article, “In Developer’s Trial, E-Mail Note Cites an Obama Role.” Like everything involving Tony Rezko and the Obamas, this article is complicated and boring… What is interesting is part of this NYT sentence in reference to a 2003 email: “The vaguely worded message also seemed to raise the possibility that Mr. Obama, who at the time was chairman of the Illinois Senate’s health committee, had been involved in recommending candidates for the board.”… Wait a minute? Did that say Mr. Obama was “chairman of the Illinois Senate’s health committee?” And this was while Mrs. Obama was being paid over $100,000 per year by one of Chicago’s three big private hospitals to do something or other? Isn’t that a conflict of interest?
And that’s not the only question about Michelle’s value to the university hospitals.  See below.

Michelle Obama’s hospital: On senator’s wish-list (by Mike Dorning at The Swamp, Chicago Tribune’s Washington Bureau)
Among the pork-barrel spending requests Barack Obama has made since arriving in the U.S. Senate is $1 million for the hospital where his wife worked at the time and $8 million for weapons technology made by a big defense contractor with close ties to a major fundraiser. Obama released on Thursday [3/13/08] a list of all his requests for earmarked federal spending in 2005 and 2006. He already had released a list of spending requests made in 2007. In among them was a request for $1 million in federal funding in 2006 for a new pavilion at the University of Chicago Hospitals, where his wife, Michelle Obama, was a vice president at the time. The request was not ultimately included when Congress passed spending legislation that year, according to the Obama campaign.
Nevertheless, the hospital had hope…

Obama did NOT “hold the title” of a University of Chicago law school professor. (by Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times)
WASHINGTON—The University of Chicago released a statement on Thursday saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school—but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed on Friday. “He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the school… The University of Chicago did Obama no favor by saying he was a law professor when he wasn’t. This parsing is not necessary. There is nothing degrading about being a senior lecturer and bringing to students the experience of a professional in the field.
Come on, media, let’s hear this talked about endlessly, clip after clip of Obama saying he was a law professor and Nagorsky saying he wasn’t.  Let’s hear the venom dripping from the voices of opprobrium about his daring to exaggerate his resume.  Anyone?

Police interrogation law showed Obama’s skill in Illinois senate (McClatchy Newspapers)
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Facing the challenge of overhauling the death-penalty law in a state rocked by revelations of botched prosecutions, Illinois state Sen. John Cullerton made a tactical decision.
My comment: This is the ONLY KNOWN EXAMPLE of Obama’s supposed skills in bringing opposite sides together. Because of this one example we should assume he’s ready to be president? When will you stop printing the campaign’s press releases verbatim?

Did Obama Say Rev. Wright Acknowledged Offending People? (by Jake Tapper at Political Punch, ABC News)
On “The View” [Friday] morning, Barbara Walters asked Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., what he would have done had he learned about the incendiary remarks made by his since-retired pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, if Wright had not been on his way out the door? “Had the reverend not retired and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I think is the great character of this country – for all its flaws – then I wouldn’t have felt comfortable staying there at the church,” Obama said. This seemed to imply that Wright had acknowledged that he’d deeply offended people with inappropriate remarks. Right? Wrong, says the Obama campaign. “Sen. Obama was clearly saying that were Rev. Wright not retiring, he would need to be assured that the reverend understood why what he had said had deeply offended people and mischaracterized the greatness of this country,” says spox Bill Burton. Okay, except Obama wasn’t “clearly” saying that at all.
And how did the AP spin this?  See below.

Obama would have left if Wright stayed (AP)
WASHINGTON – White House hopeful Barack Obama suggests he would have left his Chicago church had his longtime pastor, whose fiery anti-American comments about U.S. foreign policy and race relations threatened Obama’s campaign, not stepped down.
As you can see from Tapper’s post, above, that’s not what Obama said at all.

Rev. Wright’s New $1.6M Digs (by SusanUnPC at No Quarter)
On top of Barack Obama’s continuing evasive and, frankly, untruthful statements about his 20 years with Rev. Wright (more about that below), we have this: OBAMA’S FORMER PASTOR GETTING $1.6M HOME IN RETIREMENT (news story): “A two-week FOX News investigation [has] uncovered where Wright will be spending a good deal of his time in retirement, and it is a far cry from the impoverished Chicago streets where the preacher led his ministry for 36 years. …”
Click through to watch the video.  Sadly, Fox is doing a better job of investigating Obama’s associations than either the corporate media or the so-called progressive media.

Obama says most Americans get long weekends ‘about 50 times a year’ (On Politics, USA Today)
At the very end of a post on The New York Times’ The Caucus blog is news about another of those kinds of gaffes by a politician that will surely make some folks wonder whether that person knows about the way “real” folks live.

C&L’s John Amato Talks About McCain’s Free Ride From The Media (by Logan Murphy at Crooks and Liars)
C&L creator, John Amato, appeared on MSNBC Friday to talk about GOP presidential candidate, John McCain’s new ad, and the free pass he’s received from the mainstream media during the primary season. We’ve covered the media’s love affair with the aging Arizona Senator, and as John points out, all he has to run on is his war record and the media has been all too happy to help him out:

The Gramm connection (by Paul Krugman)
Aha: the Politico notices that Phil Gramm, McCain’s economic guru, can also be viewed as the father of the financial crisis.  “The general co-chairman of John McCain’s presidential campaign, former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), led the charge in 1999 to repeal a Depression-era banking regulation law that Democrat Barack Obama claimed on Thursday contributed significantly to today’s economic turmoil.”… [T]he Gramm connection tells you all you need to know about where a McCain administration would stand on financial issues: squarely against any significant reform.

Rice Has Let Her ‘Interest’ In Running For VP ‘Be Known Discreetly Within Top GOP Circles’ (Think Progress)
 Earlier this week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice attended Grover Norquist’s weekly “powerhouse gathering.” One GOP operative noted that the only reason high-ranking officials go to the right-wing meeting is to “secure” their political futures. At that meeting, Rice never publicly stated whether she was interested in the vice presidential spot. But Newsmax reports that privately, Rice has indicated to prominent conservatives that she is very interested:

The Incredible Shrinking Think Tank (by Michael Dolny at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting)
The 25 most media-prominent think tanks were cited 17 percent less in 2007 than they were the year before, FAIR’s annual survey of think tank citations found. The decline was felt across the board among centrist, conservative and progressive think tanks. Once again, the centrist Brookings Institution garnered the most citations, with the general decline affecting them less than the average think tank… The decline in think tank visibility is not necessarily a bad thing. Past surveys (Extra!, 5–6/98) have indicated that think tank experts are rarely given an ideological label to put their claims in context. Given that FAIR’s surveys have consistently found that these supposedly detached experts actually tilt toward the center-right, fewer of them spinning and shaping news coverage may be a net plus for media transparency, if not diversity.

Scalia criticizes news media
WASHINGTON – Justice Antonin Scalia took the news media to task Thursday for some recent coverage of the Supreme Court.

It’s “Alienate Female Readers Day” at Wapo…again. (by bluegal at Crooks and Liars)
Yes, we love any excuse to post another Anne Taintor magnet, but just how much more misogynistic can The Washington Post get? Not satisfied with the “why are women so stupid?” story, [Thursday’s] editorial by Michael Kinsley regarding how long it takes Senator Clinton to get ready in the morning seems like an office dare gone horribly wrong.

Media Matters for America headlines

• Media run with anonymous claim that Clinton win “will require exercising the ‘Tonya Harding’ option”

• Marc Rudov on O’Reilly Factor: “Men are depressed … because men are allowing women to take over the world”

• Limbaugh falsely claimed that Obama has “never reached across the aisle as a senator in legislation”

• CNN, LA Times uncritically reported McCain’s false claim that Obama and Clinton proposed “a multibillion-dollar bailout for big banks and speculators”

• In reporting on McCain’s stated opposition to government “bail out” of “big banks,” Wash. Post, NY Times failed to note his approval of Bear Stearns aid

• NPR’s Naylor suggested McCain is opposed to government “bail[] out,” did not note his approval of Bear Stearns deal

• Wash. Post claimed McCain “most aggressive” of the three major candidates in “identifying ways to reduce spending,” ignoring cost of Iraq policy

• Casting McCain as opponent of fed intervention in mortgage crisis, Blitzer ignored his approval of Bear Stearns aid

• Blitzer skips opportunity to press Hagel on his criticism of McCain’s foreign policy

• Morning Joe allowed McCain adviser to falsely assert Clinton and Obama are “talking about raising taxes across the board”

• Fox News ran with debunked Wash. Times column questioning legality of Elton John concert for Clinton

EU condemns Dutch Koran film, upholds free speech
BRDO, Slovenia (Reuters) – European Union foreign ministers condemned on Saturday a Dutch film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence, but said its author had a right to make it under the bloc’s free speech principles.

Dutch businesses threaten to sue over anti-Islam film
THE HAGUE (AFP) – Dutch businesses Saturday threatened to sue far-right lawmaker Geert Wilders if his anti-Islam film led to a commercial boycott, as EU foreign ministers and more Muslim countries condemned it.

WMA’s New Fund: The MailRoom Fund (by Rafat Ali at Paid Content)
So that’s the name, I found out: William Morris Agency, which announced its then un-named fund along with Accel Partners and Venrock, now has a name for it: The MailRoom Fund. The explanation: rising from the mailroom… David Geffen, Barry Diller, and Mike Ovitz did, as did others. Richard Wolpert, the former president of Disney Online and the chief strategy officer at RealNetworks, is heading the fund. No investments done yet, but it is only three weeks old. For good measure, here’s the book about rising from the mailroom in Hollywood: “’The Mailroom: Hollywood History from the Bottom Up’: David Rensin”

Judge orders banks to fund Clear Channel deal
A Texas district court judge sided with Clear Channel Communications Inc. and ruled Thursday that a group of six investment banks cannot walk away from funding the $19 billion private-equity buyout of the nation’s largest radio-station owner.

MTV Networks on Verizon Wireless (Mashable)
In another Verizon announcement to further confirm the wireless provider’s dedication to mobile media, Verizon now has a slew of MTV Networks content available through its service. MTV Networks had already pushed out its own mobile efforts, but today you’ll find more of its content available on Verizon Wireless networks as well. The launch includes new mobile web sites for MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, Nickelodeon and CMT. The mobile websites will be more extensive then the content clips found through mobile networks like VCast, as they’re each their own entity, representing their respective niche audiences.

Amazon Tightens Grip on Printing
Amazon.com Inc., flexing its muscles as a major book retailer, notified publishers who print books on demand that they will have to use its on-demand printing facilities if they want their books directly sold on Amazon’s Web site. The move signals that Amazon is intent on using its position as the premier online bookseller to strengthen its presence in other phases of bookselling and manufacturing. Amazon is one of the biggest booksellers in the U.S., with a market share publishing experts estimate to be about 15%. Amazon doesn’t comment on sales.

Real World 2.0
“Our principal challenge is not to decide where we want to go, but to stay upright as we go there.” In his book, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations, author and NYU faculty member Clay Shirky describes the profound impact of social technological tools on contemporary culture—from e-mail and blogs to Twitter and wikis.  

Advertisers Expected To Spend $1.1 Billion For Local TV Online This Year: Report (Paid Content)
Local TV stations are expected to make more than $1.1 billion for online advertising this year, up 45 percent over 2007, according to a report by Borrell Associates, which offers a similarly bright outlook for online TV and the local web spending in general. The report, conducted on behalf of Television Bureau of Advertising, a local station trade group, gathered data from 534 TV stations from Borrell’s database of 3,096 local web properties.

Tibet Could Sap Coke’s Olympic Zing
So far the soft-drink giant and other sponsors won’t temper support for the Games because of China’s Himalayan crackdown. That might change