SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
February, 12 2009, 12:21pm EDT
Contact:
Jessica Levin (202) 772-8162
jlevin@mediamatters.org
Rush's Voice Leads Conservative Echo Chamber
Talk radio host spearheads rapid spread of health IT falsehood
WASHINGTON
In taking on one of the
latest examples of misinformation about the economic recovery package, Media Matters for America has documented
Rush Limbaugh leading several conservative media outlets in parroting former
New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey's falsehood that a provision in the
House-passed version of the bill grants the government authority to
"monitor treatments" and "make sure your doctor is doing what
the federal government deems appropriate."
In fact, the provision
Limbaugh and others referenced merely establishes an electronic records system
that would provide doctors with complete, accurate information about their
patients "to guide medical decisions at the time and place of
care." MSNBC's David Shuster debunked
Limbaugh's myth on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
noting that the government "will not be empowered to monitor doctors or
require them to do anything."
CNN additionally reported that when
asked about where her claim actually appeared in the bill, McCaughey pointed to
language that "didn't actually say that." Even Fox News
contributor Mort Kondracke
debunked
the claim that the bill contains anything that requires health-care
"rationing."
"Once
again, conservatives in the media are showing an utter disregard for fact in
their pursuit of a Limbaugh-hyped myth of the day about the economic recovery
package," said Erikka Knuti, a spokesperson for Media Matters. "As the story traveled from Rush to Drudge to segments
on Fox News, several media figures ignored the issue of whether the provisions
were substantively valid in favor of baseless political rhetoric disguised as
truth."
On February 9, Limbaugh repeated a falsehood that originally appeared
in a Bloomberg "commentary"
by McCaughey. McCaughey claimed that under provisions in the economic recovery
bill passed by House Democrats, "[o]ne new bureaucracy, the National
Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make
sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and
cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and 'guide' your doctor's
decisions."
The Limbaugh-promoted falsehood
quickly popped up on the Drudge Report as well as in segments on Fox News,
where Wall Street Journal senior economics writer Stephen
Moore credited Limbaugh for bringing it to his attention. By February 10,
McCaughey was invited on both CNN's Lou
Dobbs Tonight and Fox News' Glenn
Beck to peddle false claims about the bill.
Limbaugh even took credit for spreading the story, saying "Betsy
McCaughey writing at Bloomberg, I found it. I detailed it for you, and now it's
all over mainstream media. Well, it's -- it headlined Drudge for a while last
night and today. Fox News is talking about it."
Media Matters recently
documented how
Limbaugh's misrepresentations about the economic recovery package are
promoted concurrently with Republicans in Congress, Sean Hannity, and other conservative
media figures.
BACKGROUND
Limbaugh repeats health IT falsehood
from Bloomberg "commentary" on House recovery bill
https://mediamatters.org/items/200902100001
Rush
Limbaugh repeated a falsehood in a Bloomberg "commentary" by Betsy
McCaughey that claimed that under a provision in the House-passed economic
recovery bill, "[o]ne new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health
Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is
doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The
goal is to reduce costs and 'guide' your doctor's decisions." In fact, the
provisions McCaughey referenced address establishing an electronic records
system such that doctors would have information about their patients "to
help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care."
Echo
chamber: Bloomberg "commentary" health IT falsehood goes from
Limbaugh to WSJ's Moore and
Fox, back to Limbaugh
https://mediamatters.org/items/200902100031
The
Wall Street Journal's
Stephen Moore and Fox News anchors Bill Hemmer and Megyn Kelly promoted the
falsehood -- which first appeared in a Bloomberg "commentary" by
Betsy McCaughey and was subsequently promoted by Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge
-- that the economic recovery bill includes a provision that would, in Moore's words,
"hav[e] the government essentially dictate treatments." Limbaugh
later took credit for spreading this story.
Dobbs,
Beck allow McCaughey to advance health IT falsehood
https://mediamatters.org/items/200902110012
On Lou Dobbs Tonight and Glenn Beck, Dobbs and Beck allowed Betsy
McCaughey to advance the false claim that provisions in the economic recovery act
would permit the government to control health care. In fact, the provisions she
cited address establishing an electronic records system in part for the purpose
of "reduc[ing] health care costs resulting from inefficiency, medical
errors, inappropriate care, duplicative care, and incomplete information."
It does not say that the federal government will determine what constitutes
"unnecessary care."
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
LATEST NEWS
'Betrayal of Justice': US Court Nixes Plea Deals for Tortured 9/11 Defendants
"This decision will ensure nothing but a continued lack of justice and accountability for everyone involved in the 9/11 military trial at Guantánamo," said one critic.
Jul 11, 2025
Human rights defenders on Friday condemned a federal appellate panel's decision upholding former U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's withdrawal of pretrial plea agreements for three men accused of plotting the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
Austin, who served under former President Joe Biden, "indisputably had legal authority to withdraw from the agreements; the plain and unambiguous text of the pretrial agreements shows that no performance of promises had begun," the D.C. Court of Appeals panel ruled in a 2-1 decision.
Under the proposed deal, accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and alleged co-conspirators Mustafa al-Hawsawi and Walid bin Attash would have been spared execution in return for pleading guilty. The agreement came amid years of stalled legal proceedings in a case complicated by the U.S. government's torture of the defendants and efforts to cover it up.
Austin withdrew the plea agreements last August, explaining that he "long believed that the families of the victims, our service members, and the American public deserves the opportunity to see military commission trials carried out in this case."
However, attorneys for the defendants called the legally dubious military commission regime established at the Guantánamo Bay prison—notorious for detainee torture and indefinite detention—during the George W. Bush administration "obviously corrupt and rigged." During the 2000s, several military prosecutors resigned from the commissions in protest over what some of them called a rigged system designed to ensure there were no acquittals.
"The 9/11 case will never be resolved through a contested trial because the defendants were tortured by the CIA."
Last November, Air Force Col. Matthew McCall, a military judge, ruled that Lloyd "did not have the authority to do what he did, asserting that the plea deals "remain valid, and are enforceable," prompting the government's appeal. The following month, a military appeals court also ruled against Austin's bid to ditch the plea deals.
The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR)—which has long represented Guantánamo detainees—called Friday's decision "a betrayal of justice."
"This decision will ensure nothing but a continued lack of justice and accountability for everyone involved in the 9/11 military trial at Guantánamo," CCR senior staff attorney Wells Dixon said in a statement. "The Biden administration's invalidation of plea agreements that would have resulted in convictions and life sentences for the 9/11 defendants is a painful betrayal of 9/11 victims' families."
"The 9/11 case will never be resolved through a contested trial because the defendants were tortured by the CIA," Dixon added. "The only way to resolve this case is for the Trump administration to succeed where every prior administration has failed and negotiate new deals with the 9/11 defendants that will finally close the 'War on Terror' prison at Guantánamo."
There are still 15 men currently imprisoned in Guantánamo, which is located on Cuban land leased to the U.S. in perpetuity by a dictatorship overthrown in 1959. Multiple detainees have been cleared for release, one of them for 15 years.
Some legal experts doubted whether the U.S. government would ever be able to try, let alone convict, the 9/11 suspects. Military judges and prosecutors have cited defendants' torture in declining to proceed with cases against them. Many men and boys were tortured at CIA "black sites," Guantánamo, and military prisons including Abu Ghraib. At least dozens of detainees died.
The three co-defendants were all captured in Pakistan during late 2002 and early 2003. After being turned over the United States, they were sent to CIA black sites, including the notorious "Salt Pit" outside Kabul, Afghanistan, where suspected militant Gul Rahman was tortured to death in November 2002. In 2006, the men were transferred to Guantánamo.
Mohammed was subjected to interrupted drowning, commonly called "waterboarding," 183 times, as well as other torture and abuse approved under the Bush administration's "enhanced interrogation" program. Hawsawi suffered a shredded rectum resulting from sodomization during so-called "rectal hydration" and has had to manually reinsert parts of his anal cavity to defecate. Bin Attash said he was placed in stress positions for extended periods, beaten, and doused in cold water.
The co-defendants must now decide whether to appeal the ruling to the full D.C. appeals court, the U.S. Supreme Court, or both.
"Putting aside the fantasy that this case is ever going to go to trial—assuming it does go to trial and that there's a conviction—you get to sentencing, and they have a right to put forward evidence... that they were tortured," Dixon told CNN Friday. "That's never going to happen."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Only a Very Evil Person Would Ask:' Trump Flips Out After Reporter Questions Texas Flood Alert System
"I think everyone did an incredible job under the circumstances," U.S. President Donald Trump insisted.
Jul 11, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday lashed out at a reporter who asked a pointed question about the government's response to the devastating floods in Texas that claimed the lives of more than 120 people, with over 170 still missing.
During a press event that also included Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a local reporter grilled the president about the timeliness of the emergency alerts sent out to people in the flooded region.
"Several families we've heard from are obviously upset because they say that those warnings, those alerts... didn't go out in time, and they also say that people could have been saved," the reporter said. "What do you say to those families?"
"I think everyone did an incredible job under the circumstances," Trump replied. "This was, I guess [Secretary of Homeland Security] Kristi [Noem] said, a 1 in 500, 1 in 1,000 years [event], and I just have admiration for the job that everybody did."
The president then proceeded to insult the reporter personally.
"Only a bad person would ask a question like that, to be honest with you," he said. "I don't know who you are but only a very evil person would ask a question like that."
REPORTER: Families are upset because warnings didn't go out in time. What do you say to those families?
TRUMP: Well I think everyone did an incredible job under the circumstances. This was a one in 1,000 years. Only a bad person would ask a question like that. Only an evil… pic.twitter.com/IwYS6JJOCF
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 11, 2025
ABC News reported earlier this week that flood alerts last weekend were not sent out to people in the affected area until 90 minutes after a local fireman first requested one. Additionally, reported ABC some residents didn't receive the flood alerts until six hours after the initial request was made.
Democrats in Congress this week also called for an investigation into whether Trump administration cuts to federal weather monitoring and emergency management agencies may have hindered the response to the Texas floods.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Demands Democrats Push to Censure Randy Fine Over Islamophobic Attacks
"This is far from the first time he and other members of Congress have engaged in such dangerous anti-Muslim rhetoric," said the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Jul 11, 2025
The largest Muslim civil rights group in the United States on Thursday called for a censure vote over Rep. Randy Fine's latest Islamophobic attacks on progressive Muslim lawmakers—and noting that the Democratic Party's tepid response to Islamophobia has fostered an environment where politicians from both sides of the aisle seem comfortable expressing anti-Muslim bigotry.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued an action alert, urging voters to pressure their Democratic representatives in the House to support a censure vote against Fine (R-Fla.), who responded Tuesday night to Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-Minn.) criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with Islamophobic remarks that have become commonplace for the first-term congressman.
"I'm sure it is difficult to see us welcome the killer of so many of your fellow Muslim terrorists," said Fine after Omar said it was "shameful" for Congress and the Trump administration to welcome Netanyahu's third visit to Washington, D.C. this year.
He doubled down on the comments Thursday night in an interview with Chris Cuomo on NewsNation, saying that "when you adopt the policies that Ilhan Omar has adopted, when you support Hamas in the way that she has, you're supporting terrorism."
Omar has not expressed support for Hamas and unequivocally condemned the group's attack on Israel in October 2023.
Fine also called Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and New York City mayoral candidate and state Rep. Zohran Mamdani (D-36) "Muslim terrorists" last week.
CAIR said in a letter to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) that it welcomed a statement released by Jeffries, Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) a day after Fine posted the attack against Omar on the social media platform X. In their statement, the Democratic leaders called Fine's comments "unhinged, racist, and Islamophobic" as well as "bigoted and disgusting," and demanded an apology—but made no mention of formally condemning him through a House censure vote.
"We appreciate the joint statement," wrote Robert McCaw, director of CAIR's government affairs department, and Basim Elkarra, executive director of CAIR Action, the group's advocacy arm. "However, we must be honest: Rep. Fine will never apologize, this is far from the first time he and other members of Congress have engaged in such dangerous anti-Muslim rhetoric, and our community has been deeply concerned by the House leadership's failure to consistently and strongly counter various other attacks."
That failure, Elkarra and McCaw suggested, has allowed anti-Muslim views to fester within both the Republican and Democratic parties—as evidenced by other recent comments by lawmakers.
CAIR pointed to Rep. Brian Mast's (R-Fla.) statement on the House floor in November 2023—in the first weeks of Israel's U.S.-backed assault on civilians in Gaza—that "there are very few Palestinian civilians." While Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) proposed censuring Mast, CAIR noted that House leaders—who continue to insist that Israel's killing of more than 57,000 Palestinians has been the result of attacks targeting Hamas and that Israel is acting in self defense—"never spoke up against Rep. Mast's remarks."
The letter also noted Rep. Brandon Gill's (R-Texas) "hateful" remarks about Mamdani in late June, after the progressive lawmaker stunned the political establishment by winning the Democratic mayoral primary. Gill criticized Mamdani for the common South Asian cultural practice of eating with his hands, saying that "civilized people in America don't eat like this"—expressing bigotry not only toward the mayoral candidate himself but also millions of people in the U.S. whose families are from parts of the Middle East, Asia, and Africa.
Republican lawmakers are not alone in expressing Islamophobic, xenophobic bigotry, CAIR emphasized, pointing to Rep. Josh Gottheimer's (D-N.J.) reported comment in a closed-door Democratic caucus meeting in October 2023 that Muslim members of Congress were excluded from a vigil for victims of Hamas' attack on Israel and Israel's attacks on Gaza "because they're all guilty." Some lawmakers reported that Gottheimer's exact words were, "They should feel guilty."
Democratic leaders did not condemn Gottheimer's comments.
"When such sentiments go unchallenged by Democratic caucus leadership, they further normalize the dehumanization of Muslim Americans at a time of rising hate and violence," said Elkarra and McCaw, who noted that CAIR received 8,658 complaints of anti-Muslim attacks and bias last year—the highest number since it began tracking civil rights violations.
Although a censure vote in the Republican-controlled House would likely fail, wrote Elkarra and McCaw, "the introduction and advocacy for the resolution will send a message that House Democratic leadership takes bigotry seriously and that no member of Congress can smear and threaten Muslim and Palestinian members of Congress without facing consequences"—with the message hopefully getting not only to Fine but all federal lawmakers.
Zeteo journalist Prem Thakker reported that as of Thursday, five Democrats had signaled they would support a censure vote: Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.), Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.).
The latter three lawmakers said they would vote to censure Fine after Zeteo contacted them; Ryan, Torres, and Goldman were among 22 Democrats who voted in favor of censuring Tlaib in 2023 for her use of the phrase "from the river to the sea"—a call for Palestinian liberation from the Israeli government's illegal occupation.
Thakker emphasized that the stark difference between the response to Tlaib's and Fine's comments from both political parties "is not just about hypocrisy or consistency." He wrote:
On one hand, Tlaib was punished for warning of the mass suffering that would come to her people, and pleading for the government she is part of not to be complicit in it.
She wasn't listened to. And then 2 million of her people were displaced. More than 50,000 were murdered.
On the other hand, Fine has thus far been unpunished by the same people who castigated Tlaib, while he has vilified an entire religion and demonized his colleagues—all under the flag of cheering for that same genocidal violence that has afflicted the people Tlaib was trying to defend.
The unequal treatment is doubly so, given that one member's humanity is punished while another's inhumanity is tolerated, even celebrated.
In their letter, Elkarra and McCaw urged Democratic leaders to publicly affirm their support and solidarity with all Muslim members of Congress and ensure Capitol Police is providing them with sufficient security and to "commit to institutional measures to combat Islamophobia in Congress."
"This moment is a defining moral test for the Democratic Party in Congress," said CAIR. "No member should endure slander, incitement, or threats without a strong defense from their leadership. This moment will be remembered."
"American Muslims are watching," the group added. "So are millions who believe that justice and safety must be defended for all, not only for some. The choice before your caucus is whether to meet this moment with courage or allow hate to go unchallenged."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular