Chicago hasn’t had a Republican mayor in over 80 years.  Democrats have controlled the Illinois governor’s mansion and both houses of the legislature for more than a decade, with Democrats ruling the Illinois House for 28 of the last 30 years.  No matter, Chicago violence is the fault of Republicans.  We learned that this morning on CNN Newsroom when anchor Carol Costello asked her “Talk Back” guests about Retired Lt. General Russel Honore’s suggestion to use National Guard troops to curb murders in Chicago.  Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman astutely pinpointed the reason for Chicago’s carnage:

And let's be very clear about what's happening in Washington today and why it's undermining the city of Chicago, because there's a mindset now in our government, in Washington, from the Republican members of Congress, that sequestration is an acceptable way of doing business, that we can in fact engage in these massive irresponsible cuts that no one thinks is a logical approach to budgeting. 

And that undermines law enforcement in our cities; it undermines so many education opportunities for our younger people and it does in fact -- in fact create an impoverished class of our society that leads to abuse, leads to violence and leads to more Chicagos. 

That’s right.  It’s the GOP’s “mindset” that’s to blame.  Yet sequestration can’t be responsible for the 506 Chicago murders last year, when condemning Republicans for his own proposal was still a gleam in Barack Obama’s eye. 

Anchor Costello allowed Zimmerman’s absurd charge to go by with nothing but a weak “I don't think you can leave Democrats out of that one.”  How’s that for setting the record straight for those low information voters CNN caters to? 

No Republican need lend a hand in undermining the city of Chicago.  Its uninterrupted Democrat control is doing just that. 

On CNN Newsroom this morning, anchor Carol Costello reported on "Nuns on the Bus:"

COSTELLO: Normally, you see nuns working in their closely knit communities and religious orders. But a group of nuns in the United States, they are hitting the road. There are taking a bus on nine- state tour.

They are protesting the Ryan budget cuts they say will hurt the poor the most. The nuns are in Milwaukee today and that's where Ted Rowlands is. So the nuns are jumping into the political fray.

TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, they -- Carol, say, along with their bus, they want to just get their message out and what they are doing is defending the poor.

He then continued with a flattering account, noting "there's no doubt that these ladies have the energy to get their message out."   At the end of it, Costello couldn't restrain herself:

COSTELLO: You go, girls. Ted Rowlands, many thanks.

If these nuns were traveling across the country in support of the the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church, we know Costello would not be cheering them on with "You go, girls."  But since the nuns are liberals attacking modest GOP efforts to control Federal spending, they qualify.  The election is already heating up, and it looks like Costello feels less need to inhibit her
approval.  

Wednesday on CNN's Piers Morgan Tonight, Morgan interviewed GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum.  The host spent considerable time on Santorum's views on homosexuality.  Confirming the candidate is a Catholic, Morgan asked if he believes homosexuality is a sin.  Santorum stated he subscribes to his Church's teaching that it is.  Morgan asked how Santorum would react to learning one of his sons is gay and after listening to his response:

MORGAN: I guess one of the reasons it's troubling and difficult for people to come out is because of the level of bigotry that's out there against them. I have to say that your views you espoused on this issue are bordering on bigotry, aren't they?

So an orthodox Roman Catholic who adheres to his faith's determination that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered" borders on bigotry.  Not Morgan, however:

MORGAN: Well, I'm a Catholic, too. I just think, unfortunately, we're in a different era. We're in a modern world. And the fact --

Morgan didn't say why he thinks it's unfortunate we're in a different era or why he claims to be a Catholic while rejecting Church teaching, but he didn't really need to.  Fellow CNN anchors were prepared to do the heavy lifting.

On today's American Morning, a clip was played of Santorum saying, in part, "Piers Morgan called me a bigot because I believe what the Catholic Church teaches with respect to homosexuality, I'm a bigot."  Anchors Carol Costello and Ali Velshi were not going to let that go unchallenged:

COSTELLO: In all fairness Piers did not call Santorum a bigot but said we live in a different era and views about moment sexuality (sic) have certainly changed.

VELSHI: That was their point of disagreement where Piers said, I'm also Catholic and I think these views should evolve. Rick Santorum says I don't think that's true. But that was the extent of it in the interview. So if you didn't watch the interview, you just watched that second part, you may think it was a different interview.

Ah, so the Church's views on homosexuality should evolve because Piers Morgan believes they should.  Someone had better get the word to Pope Benedict XVI pronto.  At the same time, perhaps Costello can explain how saying someone's views border on bigotry isn't the same as saying he's a bigot.  Don't tell me there's a strict constructionist at CNN, even if it only pertains to grammar.    

It was good economic news on CNN's Newsroom this morning. After a brief mention of radiation in Japan , anchor Carol Costello reported:

Brand new numbers out of the Labor Department this morning. It turns out jobless claims plummeted last week. Down 6,000 to 388,000.

I'm not certain what dictionary CNN news readers use, but "plummet" wouldn't seem to be the right verb. Merriam-Webster's online reference defines plummet as "to fall perpendicularly" or "to drop sharply and abruptly." A 1.5 percent reduction in jobless claims quite clearly doesn't meet those definitions.

Moreover, the 6,000 drop figure is "seasonally adjusted" with a Labor Department statistical technique designed to accommodate fluctuations in the job market. DOL's Employment and Training report included the raw data:

The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 354,301 in the week ending March 26, a decrease of 156 from the previous week.

156 fewer jobless claims. Hundreds of billions spent by President Obama and his liberal accomplices on shovel-ready jobs and that's what results.

Yet at CNN, jobless claims "plummeted." Don't they ever tire of trying to prop up Obama's failed administration?

On CNN Newsroom this morning, anchor Carol Costello spoke with national correspondent Jason Carroll about the potential for a nuclear disaster in Japan.  Carroll noted that "some scientists say the best-case scenario at this point is that the situation in Japan ends up like Three Mile Island. . ."  This possibility  frightened the anchor:

COSTELLO: It's kind of crazy to me that we're hoping the outcome is like Three Mile Island. It's just so sad and scary.

Why?  According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island "led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community."  The average radiological exposure for 2 million people in the area was about one-sixth of that received from a chest x-ray.  Moreover, ". . .comprehensive investigations and assessments by several well-respected organizations have concluded that in spite of serious damage to the reactor, most of the radiation was contained and that the actual release had negligible effects on the physical health of individuals or the environment."

The accident at Three Mile Island was indeed the most serious in U.S. history.  Changes were implemented that, it is believed, enhance safety.  Yet the fact remains that no one died at Three Mile Island and the health effects were negligible.  Hoping that the Japanese outcome is no worse isn't crazy.

On CNN's American Morning today, anchor Carol Costello advanced a theory on who's responsible for the Let's Make a Deal environment permeating the Senate as it stumbles to completion of a health care bill.  Here is part of her exchange with CNN political analyst and GOP strategist Ed Rollins:

COSTELLO: Might (the) Republicans blame in part themselves for this, because none of them were going to vote? Didn't they sort of force Senator Reid's hand in making some of these sweetheart deals?

ROLLINS: Senator Reid could have made a sweetheart deal with the Republicans months ago. They could have knocked down walls and let insurance companies deal across state lines. There are a lot of things that Republicans...

COSTELLO: But the public option is out --

Yes, if only those intransigent Senate Republicans has been more accommodating, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, expanded Medicare coverage to “individuals exposed to environmental health hazards recognized as a public health emergency in a declaration issued by the federal government on June 17," and other special considerations wouldn't have been necessary.

Costello ignores that the public option is far from the only objection Republicans have to the Senate bill.  There's the feature of mandating Americans buy insurance.  There are the projected expenditures and savings figures that are as patently bogus as the shovel ready jobs number "Sheriff" Joe Biden spouts.  There's the problem that, other than the sweetheart deals, details on the plan and its implementation are as thin as a certain former community organizer's résumé.

And that's just for starters.  Yet Costello wonders if Republican senators might be blaming themselves for the travesty.  If only they'd set aside their principles, Democrats might not have been reduced to such flagrant bribery.

Sure, Carol, we believe that.