Anti-Bush Ad Not Rebuked; Lieberman-Cheney Inaugural?; Nets Bought Gore's Global Warming Hype; More Gore Agenda in NBC's Prime Time
-- Back to today's CyberAlert
1) All three morning shows today
played the Gore ad which ends by asking of Bush: "Is he ready to
lead?" But unlike Tuesday morning when of a Bush ad which asked
"Really?" after showing Gore insist he's never said anything
untrue, the morning shows did not wonder if the ad had gone "too
far," been too "harsh," defined "scare tactics" or
contradicted a promise to not go negative.
2) Lieberman-Cheney could really occur, Tim Russert outlined
on today's Today in offering wild speculation about the result of an
Electoral College tie.
3) Media Reality Check. "TV Balances Liberals...with
Ultra-Liberals: Networks Push Gore and Nader Line on Global Warming
'Threat,' But Ignore Skeptical Scientists."
4) NBC's Gore agenda in prime time, week #2. Last night's
The West Wing featured a subplot in which an insurance company refused to pay
for emergency surgery for a gun shot victim because he did not get
pre-approval for the life-saving emergency surgery.
5) Letterman's "Top Ten Gallup Polltaker Pet
three morning shows today played the new anti-Bush ad from the Gore campaign
which lists his supposed policy failures and then ends by asking of Bush:
"Is he ready to lead?" But unlike Tuesday morning, when the morning
shows criticized a Bush ad which asked "Really?" after showing Gore
insist he's never said anything untrue in the campaign, no one today
suggested the Gore team went "too far," was "harsh," had
utilized "Halloween scare tactics" or had contradicted a promise to
not go negative. NBC's David Gregory, however, put equal blame on both
sides, asserting the campaign "has turned ugly. Both sides now on
television with attack ads."
-- ABC's Good Morning America, November 2. Diane
Sawyer set up George Stephanopoulos to evaluate the ad, MRC analyst Jessica
Anderson observed: "I want to ask you about something else because in
these remaining days, Al Gore has an ad he's going to roll out, which he hopes
will be a clincher kind of ad and change things for him. What is it?"
"This is the big one. This is finally the ad where he questions whether
or not George W. Bush is ready to be President by looking at his proposals and
his record in Texas. Let's take a look."
Ad narrator: "As
Governor, George W. Bush gave big oil a tax break, while opposing health care
for 220,000 kids. Texas now ranks 50th in family health care. He's left the
minimum wage at $3.35 an hour. Let polluters police themselves. Today Texas
ranks last in air quality. Now Bush promises the same $1 trillion from Social
Security to two different groups. He squanders the surplus on a tax cut for
those making over $300,000. Is he ready to lead America?"
Stephanopoulos was pleased: "This is the greatest
hits of the Gore campaign. They believe by focusing hard on the Texas record
and then trying to draw this line to George W. Bush's proposals, this is the
argument they need to make in the closing days. Bush campaign says no way. Too
little, too late."
Sawyer issued no further comment or question.
Yesterday, November 1, Stephanopoulos ruminated about
the Gore reaction to the new Bush ad: "What they're wondering is, does
it go over the line, does it seem too harsh?" Next, Diane Sawyer asked
Florida Governor Jeb Bush: "We just heard that ad which ends,
'Really?' about Vice President Gore. Does that go too far for you?"
-- CBS's The Early Show, November 2. Bill Plante, MRC
analyst Brian Boyd noted, set up an ad clip: "Gore is in Pennsylvania
today and his campaign has taken the gloves off, releasing a TV spot slamming
Bush's record and asking if he's really up to the job."
Gore ad: "Now Bush
promises the same $1 trillion from Social Security to two different groups. He
squanders the surplus on a tax cut for those making over $300,000. Is he ready
to lead America?"
Compare Plante to how Diana Olick on Tuesday introduced
a clip of Bush's anti-Gore ad: "George W. Bush wrapped up his tour of
the West coast with some Halloween scare tactics in the form of a new
Republican attack ad."
-- NBC's Today. David Gregory castigated both sides,
MRC analyst Geoffrey Dickens saw: "The campaign's final mile has turned
ugly. Both sides now on television with attack ads in the crucial battleground
states. Going negative in hopes of breaking this race open. The Vice President
is the latest to strike. An ad hitting the airwaves today that knocks Bush's
record in Texas and ends with Gore's central attack against his
Brief ad clip: "Is
he ready to lead America?"
Gregory: "The ad in
response to one launched by the Bush campaign a day before, challenging Gore's
credibility. As the air war intensifies so do the jabs on the stump, Gore
claiming Bush's plan for social security investment accounts will rob seniors
of their current benefits...."
Yesterday morning Gregory argued Bush was being
hypocritical: "All of this as Governor
Bush promised earlier this week that he was going to unite and inspire and not
attack during the final week."
Back to Thursday morning, Today played the ad in full
during Matt Lauer's daily discussion with Tim Russert: "Negative ads
have been coming from both campaigns in the last couple of days. Bush came out
with one and now Al Gore has responded with this one. Let's take a look."
Narrator of Gore ad:
"As Governor, George W. Bush gave big oil a tax break while opposing
health care for 220,000 kids. Texas now ranks 50th in family health care. He's
left the minimum wage at $3.35 an hour. Let polluters police themselves. Today
Texas ranks last in air quality. Now Bush promises the same $1 trillion from
Social Security to two different groups. He squanders the surplus on a tax cut
for those making over $300,000. Is he ready to lead America?"
Lauer found the ad successful: "Pushes all the
buttons, Tim. Big oil, health care, children, minimum wage and ends with that,
'Is he ready to lead?' Is it effective?"
"Well it certainly does lay it out very clearly and crisply. And the Gore
people have focus grouped these ads to death, Matt. They believe his Texas
record makes it vulnerable. The Bush people say no. The interesting thing for
me is that closing line that you emphasize, 'Is he ready?' Al Gore has
resisted saying those words. He allowed Joe Lieberman, his running mate, and
even his wife Tipper to say it. But he kept saying, no, no, I'm staying above
the fray. This ad is paid for by the Gore-Lieberman team. Al Gore is now
pregnant. He has paid for an ad which challenges whether or not George W. Bush
is competent, has the capacity, is ready to be President."
Lieberman and Vice President Cheney? Entering wild speculation mode about
the most extreme scenario, Tim Russert this morning laid out how an
Electoral College tie could lead to President Joe Lieberman picking Dick
Cheney to be his VP.
MRC analyst Geoffrey Dickens picked up on the
political science "what if" session on today's Today prompted
by Matt Lauer wondering: "Couple of quick scenarios. The split
election. More possible now than before?"
it something? Not since 1888. But if you look at Bush's margin in the
popular vote and Gore keeping it competitive in the Electoral College,
could we have a situation where one candidate wins the popular vote but
loses the Electoral College? What if each candidate got 269 electoral
what are the chances of that?"
remote, but it is possible! You could take a calculator and figure it out
in 30 seconds. It then goes to the House of Representatives where a
candidate would have to have 26 state delegations of Congressmen vote for
him. If you didn't get 26, if there was a deadlock it would go to the
Senate where the Senate would elect a Vice President who would become
acting President. If the Senate, the new Senate is 50 Democrats, 50
Republicans, guess who breaks the tie? Al Gore. Joe Lieberman becomes Vice
President and acting President. Then what does he do? Because the Senate
becomes 51-49 Republican then, because the Connecticut Governor replaces
Lieberman with a Republican and if Lieberman then becomes President and he
wants a Vice President confirmed by both houses he gets a Republican Vice
President, Dick Cheney. Lieberman-Cheney. Isn't that what people asked for
after that debate?"
afternoon's Campaign 2000 Media Reality Check titled, "TV Balances
Liberals...with Ultra-Liberals: Networks Push Gore and Nader Line on
Global Warming 'Threat,' But Ignore Skeptical Scientists." For
this report distributed by fax today, Rich Noyes, Director of the MRC's
Free Market Project, showed how reporters relayed Al Gore's global
warming fears last week without noting how the study he cited is
questionable and was leaked early so Gore would have fresh ammunition.
To view this Media Reality Check as an Adobe Acrobat
The pull-out quote in the middle of the page:
The Viewpoint the Networks Excluded
cost if we had rushed to do what Gore proposed in his book Earth in the
Balance? Gas prices would be as high as they are in Britain, where we have
witnessed the first riots created by global-warming taxes and where we may
also witness the fall of a government because of unpopular global-warming
policies." -- climate expert Patrick Michaels, "An October
Environmental Surprise," The Washington Times September 22.
Now the Thursday Afternoon, November
2, Media Reality Check:
Does this sound balanced to you? Last week Al Gore trumpeted a leaked
UN report on the alleged perils of global warming, so the CBS Evening News
showed him pledging "to protect the environment with all my heart and
soul." Balancing Gore on the October 26 newscast: Ralph Nader, the
only other candidate who thinks global warming is a real threat requiring
immediate government intervention in the free market.
"Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his
record on the environment is anything to be proud of," Nader twitted
from Gore's left. The only other on-camera source in John Roberts'
report: a Greenpeace spokesman, who said of Gore: "The promises are
great, the rhetoric is great. Keeping the promises, doing what you say --
that's our concern."
CBS never told viewers of skeptical scientists whose insistence on
proof is plainly irritating to those who impatiently wish to start
re-shaping American society right away. Instead, the pols, activists and
journalists conducted a closed discussion that treated the UN paper as
"Earth's average surface temperature could rise from 2.7 to
almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit over the next 10 years -- that's according
to a draft report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change," asserted Natalie Pawelski, host of CNN's weekly
"Eleven degrees may not sound like much of a change, but to put it
into perspective, consider this: the Earth's average global temperature
today is only about nine degrees warmer than it was during the last Ice
Age," Pawelski hyped, but allowed "some observers are wondering
about the timing of this report, leaking out so close to the presidential
Observers are doing a lot more than "wondering." Weeks ago,
climate expert Patrick Michaels warned that Gore would cynically seek an
"October environmental surprise," and -- right on schedule --
the heavily political UN document found its way to the public a month
early. "A copy of the summary was obtained by The New York Times from
someone who was eager to have the findings disseminated before the
meetings in The Hague," related Andrew Revkin, the Times reporter who
received the leaked document.
TV reporters haven't talked about the still-to-be-officially-released
report's flaws, but "fourteen international experts gathered on
Capitol Hill in June to review the report. They unanimously agreed it
contains systematic errors and omissions bordering on scientific
fraud," revealed Cato Institute scholar Steve Milloy in a Sunday New
York Post op-ed. Further, according to an editorial in today's European
edition of the Wall Street Journal, "The vast evidence and models
compiled by over 100 scientists, and casting doubt on the evidence of
human-enhanced greenhouse effect, were ignored."
Two questions for the networks: Are you unable to track down any of the
numerous experts who disagree with the Gore-Nader-Greenpeace view of the
environment? And will you seek to discover whether it's really the Earth
or the Democrats' campaign that's in such peril that it is crucial to
pump out a sloppy summary report a few weeks ahead of schedule?
END Media Reality Check
Gore agenda in prime time, week #2. Last night's The West Wing featured
a subplot in which an insurance company refused to pay for emergency
surgery for a gun shot victim because the ambulance took him to an
"out of network" hospital and he did not get pre-approval for
the life-saving emergency surgery.
As reported in the Monday CyberAlert Extra in an
item by the MRC's Rich Noyes, which the Wall Street Journal editorial
page picked up on Wednesday, last week The West Wing and two other NBC
dramas illustrated liberal Al Gore points about the evils of businesses
which he pledges to remedy:
Triple-Play: In Two Days, Three Dramas Pushed Plot Lines Which Echoed Gore
Campaign Themes." A fresh MediaNomics article documented the in-kind
contributions last week to Gore by The West Wing, Law & Order and ER
in showcasing plots with greedy pharmaceutical companies, an uncaring HMO
which led to a murder and a doctor fired for caring for an uninsured
For details, go to:
Wednesday night, November 1, The West Wing took up
the health insurance plight of presidential aide "Josh Lyman,"
played by Bradley Whitford, who was shot and critically wounded at the end
of last season in the shooting of the presidential party as they walked to
limos which, it turned out, was aimed not at the President but was
committed by skinheads trying to kill the black boyfriend of the
Anyway, in last night's episode Josh read aloud
from a letter: "They're still saying I owe them $50,000 and that
'failure to pay will result in a negative report on your
Exasperated, he asked: "They're referring me
to insurance code 4336. You know what that means?"
Later, aide "Sam Seaborn," played by Rob
Lowe, explained what he was working on for Josh: "The hospital was
out of network and therefore they're claiming responsibility for only 20
percent of a life saving medical procedure. Also didn't get the
procedure cleared beforehand."
"Toby Ziegler" responded: "His lung was collapsed and blood
stopped flowing to his brain. He was supposed to dial-up the automated
24-hour customer care service line?"
Sam: "Keeps up
like this he's going to have to sue these people."
"I like a country where you can sue the insurance company but not the
people who shot you."
That's quite a stretch from reality. I really
doubt any reputable insurance company covering federal workers would
require pre-approval in such an emergency situation.
November 1 Late Show with David Letterman, the "Top Ten Gallup
Polltaker Pet Peeves." Copyright 2000 by Worldwide Pants, Inc.
10. When boss says you can't go home till you find a Pat Buchanan voter
9. Response sheet has boxes for "yes" and "no" -- but
not "bite me"
8. Every Christmas, the same gift from Gallup: a crappy Radio Shack
7. Looking at pie charts all day makes you really, really hate pie
6. Whenever he slips in the polls, George W. Bush threatens to have you
5. The hourly calls from Nader asking, "Am I winning yet?"
4. Knowing after November 7th, only question you'll be asking is,
"Regular or unleaded?"
3. Letterman always answers the door naked
2. When wife complains about your "5% margin of error"
1. All them numbers is confusin'
And from the Late Show Web page, some of the
"extra" entries which didn't make the final cut:
-- Telling your co-workers you actually found a Buchanan supporter, and
no one believes you
-- When date informs you there's a 0% likelihood of sex
-- There just aren't enough polls focusing on hot chicks 18-22
-- Boss getting suspicious when all the "homes" you've called
start with 1-900
-- Having to report that Hillary's winning -- Brent Baker
Support the MRC, an educational foundation dependent upon contributions
which make CyberAlert possible, by providing a tax-deductible
donation. Use the secure donations page set up for CyberAlert
readers and subscribers:
>>>To subscribe to CyberAlert, send a
blank e-mail to:
@topica.com. Or, you can go to:
Either way you will receive a confirmation message titled: "RESPONSE
REQUIRED: Confirm your subscription to email@example.com."
After you reply, either by going to the listed Web page link or by simply
hitting reply, you will receive a message confirming that you have been
added to the MRC CyberAlert list. If you confirm by using the Web page
link you will be given a chance to "register" with Topica. You
NOT have to do this; at that point you are already subscribed to
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
Send problems and comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
can learn what has been posted each day on the MRC's Web site by
subscribing to the "MRC Web Site News" distributed every weekday
afternoon. To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: email@example.com.
Or, go to: http://www.mrc.org/newsletters.<<<
Home | News Division
| Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts
Media Reality Check | Notable Quotables | Contact
the MRC | Subscribe