Bradley & Gore: Forget the Past; NARAL Test; Bush Scolded as Racist Lout
1) Back on May 9 CBS and NBC
reminded viewers of how Bush and McCain attacked each other in the primary
season as Tom Brokaw asked McCain if he’d "endorsed somebody who’s
not qualified to be President?" But Thursday night the two networks stuck
to the rosy image and refused to show how Bradley once denounced Gore.
2) The liberal litmus test on
abortion: FNC’s Brit Hume recounted NARAL’s report card on potential VPs.
Plus, FNC reported on a judge’s quest to get the White House to produce
missing e-mails.
3) "Making Light of a
Dixiecrat's Dark Past," intoned the scolding headline over a Washington
Post story about how the Bush campaign put out a joking press release about
how Strom Thurmond said: "I ran against Harry Truman. And Mr. Gore, you
are no Harry Truman." But six years ago the Post ran a lighthearted piece
on Thurmond.
4) "How dare you use the term
‘Amcrash derailments,’" an e-mail writer lectured CyberAlert.
"You shouldn't be FORCED to drive or fly. That's immoral."
>>> All
the Gumbel stuff all on one page. MRC Webmaster Andy Szul has put together
all the latest Gumbel material, from video of his "What a f***ing
idiot" outburst to the MRC’s July 11 newspaper ads about that to
his most recent examples of liberal comments on the Early Show to the
MRC’s compilations of Gumbel’s bias from his NBC days. Go to:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/news/gumbel/gumbelreturn.html
<<<
1
Quite
a contrast between how CBS and NBC handled the endorsements by the losers
to the two party’s eventual presidential nominees.
Back on May 9 the CBS
Evening News didn’t include a negative word about Al Gore from George
Bush or John McCain as Bob Schieffer showed primary season clips of the
two Republicans attacking each other. Thursday night, July 13, however,
after Bill Bradley endorsed Al Gore, Dan Rather noted how "the George
Bush camp today pumped out some old, unflattering Bradley quotes on
Gore," but CBS refused to inform viewers of them as Rather eagerly
relayed how the two said they "stand against what they call ‘Bush
tax cuts for the rich.’"
Thursday night NBC
Nightly News simply showcased Gore and Bradley saying complimentary things
about each other and how Democrats are better for the country. NBC failed
to mention Bradley’s vociferous attacks on Gore earlier this year, but
the night McCain endorsed Bush the NBC show featured an interview with
McCain in which Tom Brokaw asked if he were disappointed that Bush failed
to "condemn" Pat Robertson for saying McCain’s temper would
make him a "dangerous" President and had he now "endorsed
somebody who’s not qualified to be President in terms of foreign
policy?"
Meanwhile, on ABC’s
World News Tonight, Terry Moran at least did observe before playing one
old primary quote: "It could not have been easy for Bradley who had
accused Gore of lying about his record during the primaries and whose
disdain for Gore was at times palpable." FNC’s Jim Angle ran three
examples of Bradley denouncing Gore during a January debate.
Now back to CBS and NBC
contrasts:
-- CBS Evening News. Dan
Rather delivered the entirety of CBS’s July 12 coverage, which did not
include any soundbites, but was read over video of the Democrats lakeside
in Green Bay:
"In the presidential campaign, Democrat Bill
Bradley today gave his personal, public and enthusiastic endorsement to Al
Gore. They were side by side in Wisconsin, their first joint appearance
since Gore beat Bradley in the primaries. The George Bush camp today
pumped out some old, unflattering Bradley quotes on Gore. But Bradley said
today he and Gore stand together on all the important issues, such as
health care and education, and stand against what they call ‘Bush tax
cuts for the rich.’"
Compare that to Bob
Schieffer’s May 9 story in which he reminded viewers: "Bush flew in
knowing he needs McCain to woo independents, but in truth both men dreaded
this meeting and why not. Remember: They once promised never to go
negative and shook on it [video of shaking hands at a debate]. But within
days, Bush had called McCain a hypocrite."
CBS then showed a
soundbite of Bush from February 7: "This is a man who made his
campaign on going after lobbyists and insiders and yet he’s raised more
money than anybody in the campaign from lobbyists and insiders."
Schieffer: "McCain accused Bush of the worst
Republican sin."
Clip of McCain in a primary season TV ad: "His ad
twists the truth like Clinton. We’re all pretty tired of that."
Schieffer: "It got so bad, friends said it wasn't
until last night during a book signing that McCain finally decided to
endorse Bush...."
-- NBC Nightly News.
Anchor Brian Williams announced the July 13 development, sans any negative
words:
"Four months after Al Gore defeated him for the
Democratic presidential nomination, former Senator Bill Bradley finally
endorsed the Vice President today. At a rally in Green Bay Wisconsin
Bradley, the former pro basketball star, said winning is a team sport and
he’ll work to help the Democrats win Congress and the White House."
NBC played two clips from Bradley: "I will work to
accomplish both because I believe Democrats have a better chance of
guiding America to a brighter future than do Republicans and it’s not
even close."
"And today, I want to make it clear that I endorse
Al Gore for President of the United States."
Williams picked up: "Gore in turn praised Bradley
for bringing quote ‘high purpose and high ideals’ to the primary
contest and he said Bradley would be an important part of the coming
campaign and of this country’s future."
Opening the May 9
broadcast, though it had taken McCain two fewer months to come around, Tom
Brokaw had stressed McCain’s distaste for the necessary announcement:
"The Pittsburgh meeting had been on the calendar for some time, but
it was only recently that McCain decided to endorse. What one reporter
called, ‘taking your medicine now, not later.’"
NBC didn’t question
Bradley’s enthusiasm, but here was Brokaw’s first inquiry in his taped
interview with McCain: "You described what you did today as,
‘taking your medicine now, rather than later.’ That doesn’t sound to
me like a ringing and enthusiastic endorsement."
As detailed in the May
10 CyberAlert, Brokaw then brought up Pat Robertson: "On NBC’s Meet
the Press last Sunday, the evangelist and political activist Pat Robertson
questioned McCain’s stability."
Robertson in a clip from Meet the Press: "Can you
imagine dealing with our foreign powers and you get mad and you fly off
the handle. It could be very dangerous."
Brokaw to McCain: "When given a chance to condemn
those remarks today, Governor Bush failed to do so. Did that disappoint
you?"
McCain: "Yes."
Brokaw: "What did you think when you heard Pat
Robertson’s remarks?"
McCain called them vicious and bad for the Republican
Party before Brokaw helpfully reminded viewers: "During the campaign
McCain attacked Robertson as an ‘agent of intolerance’ who hurts the
Republican Party."
Brokaw next inquired: "During the course of your
campaign against George Bush, you also said you’re the only one running
for President who knows the military and understands the world, the only
one. Have you endorsed somebody who’s not qualified to be President in
terms of foreign policy?"
-- ABC and FNC. Thursday
night, July 13, ABC anchor Peter Jennings acknowledged all has not been
rosy between the two liberals: "In presidential politics today, well,
it’s just the way it is. Four months after they fought a nasty and
personal primary battle, former Senator Bill Bradley has taken his
medicine and endorsed his party’s nominee Al Gore."
Terry Moran began from Green Bay: "They walked
down the political aisle a little stiffly, a reluctant couple still
carefully keeping their distance. Al Gore and Bill Bradley came to a
pretty lakeside park in downtown Green Bay and went through the
motions."
Bill Bradley: "I endorse Al Gore for President of
the United States."
Moran: "It could not have been easy for Bradley
who had accused Gore of lying about his record during the primaries and
whose disdain for Gore was at times palpable."
Clip of Bradley during a CNN/Time debate: "Well,
what you’ve seen is an elaborate, what I call Gore dance."
Moran: "Today Bradley was careful to couch his
endorsement as a matter of party unity rather than personal
conviction..."
Moran also pointed how
unlike McCain and Bush, Bradley and Gore avoided a press conference which
could have exposed their "bitterness." Maybe, but it’s
doubtful CBS or NBC would have cared.
On FNC’s Special
Report with Brit Hume, reporter Jim Angle took some time to show how
Bradley had once denounced Gore: "Bradley quoted coach Vince Lombardi
as saying that victory is a team sport as he called on all Democrats to
unite behind Gore. Even that much couldn’t have been easy for Bradley.
During the primaries he was outraged by Gore’s tactics, and said
so."
Bradley, in clips from the January 26 CNN/WMUR debate:
"And my question to you is, why should we believe you that you will
tell the truth as President if you don’t tell the truth as a
candidate?"
"That’s what’s been your campaign. A thousand
promises, a thousand attacks. A promise to every little special interest
group, attack, attack, attack every day."
"If you’re running a campaign that’s divisive,
that’s the kind of presidency that you’ll also have."
Angle soon pointed out:
"And Gore repaid Bradley’s endorsement by praising the same Bradley
positions that he ridiculed during the campaign."
Gore: "There is no more passionate voice for
justice and equality in all of America than Senator Bill Bradley and I
look forward to working with Bill Bradley."
+++ See what CBS and NBC
refused to show. Late Friday morning MRC Webmaster Andy Szul will post a
RealPlayer clip of the part of Angle’s story with the Bradley clips from
earlier this year. Go to: http://www.mrc.org
2
The
left-wing litmus test on abortion and a former government official
maintained the White House could produce the e-mails it has so far failed
to turn over. Thursday night’s Special Report with Brit Hume on FNC
reported two items I did not see elsewhere:
-- Brit Hume noted on
the July 13 show, as transcribed by MRC analyst Brad Wilmouth: "NARAL,
that’s the National Abortion Rights Action League, the national
organization that promotes universal access to abortion, has released its
report card on what the group thinks of the possible vice presidential
candidates for the Democrats and Republicans.
"Not surprisingly, NARAL gave seven of the ten
Republicans an ‘F,’ with Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge getting a
‘D,’ New York Governor Pataki a ‘C,’ and New Jersey Governor
Christine Todd Whitman a ‘B.’ Seven of the Democrats were graded
‘A,’ with Florida Senator Bob Graham getting a ‘B,’ Indiana
Senator Evan Bayh and House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt rating only a
‘C.’
"National Right to Life Committee says it has no
plans to grade possible VP candidates, but a spokeswoman said, ‘If
George W. Bush is always being asked if he’s considering a pro-choice
running mate, why isn’t Al Gore being asked if he’s considering a
pro-life partner?’"
Good question.
For the record, these
Republicans earned an F: Dole, Engler, Hagel, Kasich, Keating, Fred
Thompson and Tommy Thompson.
These Democrats got an
A: Durbin, Feinstein, Kerry, Leiberman, Mitchell, Richardson and Shaheen.
-- A bit later Hume
introduced a story: "A former Clinton administration staff member
says the White House could have produced those missing e-mails. The
testimony came in another hearing on the matter in federal court in
Washington. But White House officials say technical problems are holding
up the retrieval process, and it could be months before any of the lost
e-mails surface."
Collins Spencer, who I’ve never heard of and must be
a new guy, explained: "Larry Klayman, founder of the conservative
group Judicial Watch, heads back to court to take on the White House. By
his side, Cheryl Hall and Betty Lambuth, two former White House computer
experts who blew the whistle in the missing e-mail case. U.S. District
Judge Royce Lamberth asked why it’s taken so long to find thousands of
lost e-mail messages from administration members, including President
Clinton and Vice President Gore...
"Larry Klayman put former White House computer
consultant Cheryl Hall on the stand to testify that the White House is
dragging their feet..."
3
It’s
okay for us to joke around about a politician’s segregationist past, but
if a Republican candidate does we’ll portray him and his staff as
insensitive racist louts. In a front page of the "Style" section
piece on Thursday, the Washington Post berated the Bush campaign for a
joking press release making fun of Al Gore being "Truman-like"
in blaming Congress. The release quoted Senator Strom Thurmond as saying:
"Mr. Gore, I knew Harry Truman. I ran against Harry Truman. And Mr.
Gore, you are no Harry Truman."
"Making Light of a
Dixiecrat's Dark Past," intoned the scolding headline. Post reporter
Michael Powell recalled: "It is factually correct that Thurmond knew
Truman. In 1948, he accused Truman of ‘stabbing the South in the back’
by integrating the armed forces. A few weeks later, Thurmond broke with
Truman and the Democratic Party and announced a third-party presidential
challenge. Thurmond's party dubbed itself the Dixiecrats. Its raison
d'etre was a defense of Southern white supremacy against the forces of
integration."
But six years ago the
same section of the Post featured a lighthearted piece on a birthday party
for Thurmond in which the reporter recounted the sight of Thurmond downing
11 oysters and admired his agility at his old age: "He stands erect.
His voice is strong. His blue eyes are clear. He hears just fine, without
the aid of technology. He remembers names of aides, generals and
constituents. He remembers their children's names."
First, an excerpt of the
Post’s July 13 story by Michael Powell:
George W. Bush's presidential campaign had
a clever idea this week. It released a statement by Republican Strom
Thurmond, the century-old U.S. Senator from South Carolina.
"In Al Gore's latest reincarnation, he
claims to be Truman-like, blaming Congress," Thurmond says. "Mr.
Gore, I knew Harry Truman. I ran against Harry Truman. And Mr. Gore, you
are no Harry Truman."
It is factually correct that Thurmond knew
Truman. In 1948, he accused Truman of "stabbing the South in the
back" by integrating the armed forces. A few weeks later, Thurmond
broke with Truman and the Democratic Party and announced a third-party
presidential challenge.
Thurmond's party dubbed itself the
Dixiecrats. Its raison d'etre was a defense of Southern white supremacy
against the forces of integration. "All the laws of Washington and
all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, our
schools, our churches and places of recreation," Thurmond
thundered....
His 1948 candidacy -- which received 39
electoral votes--would become a founding stone of the massive white
resistance to the civil rights movement. And...[ellipses in Post story]
"Let me stop you right there,"
says Ari Fleischer.
Fleischer is Bush's campaign spokesman, and
he has just listened to a recitation of these facts. It misses the point,
he says. Thurmond and Bush, he says, were trying to nettle Gore.
Reporters, he says, "laughed uproariously" when they read the
senator's statement.
"We are in a day when people make
light of their past," Fleischer says. "The only people who've
complained are the partisans at the DNC. And you."
Humor-challenged? That's a distinct
possibility. Another possibility is that in America, historical memory is
the first thing to go. That our amnesia makes us complicit in what
politicians would prefer that we forget.
Amnesia is central to the mannered theater
that is life in Washington. You see Thurmond walk the Capitol's marbled
corridors, and you mentally launder his reputation. Think: cute old
codger, elder statesman. A Beltway grandee who presided over his U.S.
Senate colleagues (97 percent of whom are white) at the impeachment of a
president.
Don't think: former white supremacist and
segregation's champion. And don't read the history books like "Ol'
Strom: An Unauthorized Biography of Strom Thurmond," by Jack Bass and
Marilyn W. Thompson, because you might find something like this:
In 1948 the Supreme Court threw out South
Carolina's white primary, decreeing that the party could not bar blacks
from voting. This outraged Thurmond, who complained that "every
American has lost part of his fundamental rights."
A Thurmond-controlled party convention
quickly adopted an oath requiring that primary voters swear allegiance to
racial segregation in religious, social and educational affairs....
Fleischer would simply direct a reporter's
attention to the bottom line. "Thurmond indeed ran against Harry
Truman. What more can I tell you? There's no 'there' there to your
story."
As it happens, candidate Bush spoke to the
NAACP convention on Monday, the same day his campaign released the
Thurmond statement. Bush gave a fine and eloquent speech, and in the fifth
paragraph he quoted Lincoln on history and remembrance:
"President Lincoln pleaded to our
divided nation to remember that 'we cannot escape history....We will be
remembered in spite of ourselves.' "
END Excerpt
To read the entire
story, go to:
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32790-2000Jul12.html
But by the Post’s
standard, it too was guilty of allowing "amnesia" to make
"us complicit in what politicians would prefer that we forget."
Rich Noyes, Director of
the MRC’s Free Market Project, used Nexis to dig up an illuminating
December 6, 1994 "Style" section piece by Mark Fisher, kindly
headlined, "Not Over The Hill: Strom Turns 92 With an Eye on
'96."
Here’s an excerpt from
the beginning of the piece:
It has come to this: Strom Thurmond, who
turned 92 years old yesterday, and who has already held fund-raisers for
his 1996 reelection campaign, favors term limits.
"It might be good to have fresh blood
up here," Thurmond said last night at his birthday party at the
Reserve Officers Association on Capitol Hill. "I think, overall,
limits would be best for the country. Everybody might not be as good a man
as I am in the Senate."
He stands erect. His voice is strong. His
blue eyes are clear. He hears just fine, without the aid of technology. He
remembers names of aides, generals and constituents. He remembers their
children's names.
The next chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee said he has indeed heard of his party's vaunted
"Contract With America." "Now I haven't read that contract,
but I like what I've heard," he said.
The senator stepped over to the buffet last
night and, before an aide gently pointed out that the photographers were
having a field day, Thurmond scarfed up 11 raw South Carolina oysters.
Suddenly, the oysters, which had been
sitting untouched at one end while shrimp were being sucked up by the
dozen at the other end, became the center of attention. When a healthy,
alert 92-year-old man eats oysters, you can forget the warnings about
deadly microorganisms. You eat the oysters.
"Senator," asked a perky TV
reporter from back home in South Carolina, "what's your secret?"
"Secret for what?" Thurmond replied.
"Your secret for living so long."
"I had parents who gave me good genes," said the senator, who
has three living sisters.
And then he added: "Diet and exercise. Every morning, I do 50
minutes' exercise. Twenty minutes twisting, stretching, turning; 10
minutes sit-ups; 20 minutes driving a stationary bicycle. Lay off sugars
and fats. More fruits, more vegetables, less red meats."....
END Excerpt
Not exactly a
condemnaton of his racist past, though the story did later give a sentence
to how he was once a "segregationist."
A photo caption in the
July 13, 2000 story complained: "In 1948 Strom Thurmond was a
champion of segregation, a fact hardly anyone seems to remember, or care
about."
Speaking of not caring
about the past, how many times during the South Carolina primary do you
recall journalists reminding viewers or readers that current Democratic
Senator Ernest Hollings was the Governor of the state in the early 1960s
when the Confederate flag was placed atop the State House?
4
"How
dare you use the term ‘Amcrash derailments,’" an e-mail writer
chided CyberAlert after reading the July 11 CyberAlert item which quoted
CNN’s Jeff Greenfield advocating that some of the surplus be allocated
to railroads. Greenfield complained about how the U.S. does not "have
a decent rail system. We are about forty years behind, thirty years behind
every other industrialized country." To read the item, go to:
http://archive.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2000/cyb20000711.asp#3
I had jokingly ended the
article: "Just what we need, more Amcrash derailments."
I don’t normally share
reader comments about CyberAlerts, but this one came in to the MRC’s
general e-mail address, so is probably not a CyberAlert subscriber, and is
so hyperbolic that I’d thought readers would find it amusing. I won’t
reveal the writer’s identity, just his reasoning.
The writer insisted
he’s no liberal but demanded the "freedom to choose what mode of
transportation you want to use. You shouldn't be FORCED to drive or fly.
That's immoral."
Here’s the e-mail in
full:
In response to your statement and what Jeff
Greenfield said, how dare you use the term "Amcrash derailments"
in your statement regarding Jeff Greenfield's stand on having better
trains. I may not agree with what a lot of these liberals say but he's got
a point that America has no business having an inefficient rail system.
I am one of the millions of Amtrak riders
myself and I've never been in an accident but I have been on late trains a
number of times because of freight traffic due to recent mega-mergers. But
regardless of what your politics is, America deserves a better rail
system. That's a fact. Down in Florida, Governor Jeb Bush derailed a
bullet train projects days, days after he took office. The train was being
developed with both public and private money.
Now you may say, "Why should railroads
be subsidized?" Well, I and many people believe that if roads (which
are more costly, environmentally degrading, and not solving the traffic
problems) and aviation (which is also costly, environmentally degrading,
and not solving air traffic) get billions, billions in government funds,
then railroad projects (which are the least environmentally degrading,
least costly when compared to the other two, and more pleasant to ride)
certainly deserve to benefit from more government funding too. Railroad
passengers shouldn't be written off.
Amtrak would be a much better rail system
if our government hadn't gipped it. Amtrak would have faster and safer
trains if they had their own tracks (meaning freight trains wouldn't
increase wearing and tearing) separate from grade crossings but again, the
only reason why our government writes it off is because Amtrak doesn't
make political contributions like the highway and aviation lobbies do.
It's not Amtrak's fault that impatient drivers break the law, go around
crossings, and contribute to accidents. It is the transportation issue why
I'm not a Republican anymore because I've been so heartbroken by their
actions lately. I thought conservatives believed in more freedom. That
should include freedom to choose what mode of transportation you want to
use. You shouldn't be FORCED to drive or fly. That's immoral. Despite the
numerous support Gov. Gray Davis has been giving to the railroads in
California I will never turn Democrat because they had achance to do
something when they controlled Congress for so many years.
So I just wanted to express my views on
this and if you're going to continue to be biased towards the railroads
please don't use the term "Amcrash" anymore. That's very crude.
END Reprint of e-mail
letter
Okay, from now on it’s
Slamtrak. -- Brent Baker