Taxes Cut "As Much As Possible"; 41 Too Far Right; ABM Decision Means U.S. "Going Back on Its Word"; ABC Not Liberal Enough
1) Quote of the Weekend. Time magazine’s Margaret
Carlson on CNN’s Capital Gang: "Taxes have been cut as much as is
humanly, or inhumanly, possible."
2) Most Unintentionally Hilarious Exchange of the Weekend.
Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes relaying the view of Senator Jim Jeffords that
not only is the current President Bush too conservative, but "the
elder George Bush had moved so far to the right that he couldn’t win
3) When OMB Director Mitch Daniels denounced "tax and
spend extremists in the Democratic Senate caucus," CNN’s Wolf
Blitzer was taken aback by the bizarre notion: "‘Tax and spend
extremists’ in the Democratic Party?"
4) On weekend talk shows, journalists Eleanor Clift, Al
Hunt, Margaret Carlson and Nina Totenberg all criticized President
Bush’s decision to pursue missile defense. But, as she denounced missile
defense herself, NPR’s Nina Totenberg complained about how
"conservative Republicans have a total knee-jerk thing about SDI.
They cannot get over it."
5) On Thursday night the NBC News team nefariously
characterized President Bush’s decision to withdraw from the ABM treaty.
Tom Brokaw stated Bush "deliberately broke a treaty." MSNBC
anchor Brian Williams claimed Bush had the U.S. "deliberately going
back on its word."
6) ABC News isn’t liberal enough for Carole Simpson. On
a PBS show to air Tuesday night, she will bemoan how the elimination of
the "American Agenda" segment on the weekday World News Tonight
means "it's kind of a depressing time right now. I don't think we are
fulfilling what I always thought was our historic role, which was to
afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted."
7) Only one week left for you to benefit from the special
discount for CyberAlert subscribers for the MRC’s "Dishonor Awards:
Roasting the Most Outrageously Biased Liberal Reporters of the Year."
It’s January 17 in Washington, DC.
the Weekend. Time magazine’s Margaret Carlson on CNN’s Saturday night
Capital Gang, commenting on the retirement of House Majority Leader Dick
"Dick Armey’s mandate to cut taxes, it’s
complete. Taxes have been cut as much as is humanly, or inhumanly,
possible. So, he can go."
That’s the apparently genuine belief of a
member in good standing of the Washington press corps, Time’s former
Deputy Washington Bureau Chief who is now a columnist and reporter for the
Unintentionally Hilarious Exchange of the Weekend. Mike Wallace on 60
Minutes relaying the view of Senator Jim Jeffords that "the elder
George Bush had moved so far to the right that he couldn’t win
Tied to the release of his new book, My
Declaration of Independence, on Sunday night CBS’s 60 Minutes ran a
largely laudatory profile in courage about the formerly Republican Senator
who switched allegiance in May so Democrats could take control of the
Mike Wallace never described Jeffords as
liberal in passing along Jeffords’ complaints about how President Bush
is too conservative, preferring to describe him as a "moderate,"
as in referring to his "fellow Republican moderates."
The segment ended with Wallace relating
Jeffords’ take on 41: "In his book, Jeffords wrote that not only
did he feel President Bush was moving too far to the right, but it turns
out George W. wasn’t the first President Bush to disappoint him. The
Senator told us that despite his advice, the elder George Bush had moved
so far to the right that he couldn’t win re-election and that two months
before Bill Clinton beat him, the elder Bush forecast his own defeat to
Jeffords: "This is George Bush Senior, and
he came and he said, ‘you know, I apologize to you because I did not
realize that what you were telling me, the moderates, were where I should
be and that if I had followed your advice I wouldn’t be in the problems
I’m having right now.’ He says ‘I know it’s over now.’ This is
Wallace: "Jeffords felt that George W. was
making his father’s mistake all over again -- ignoring the moderates,
but with Republicans not in control of the Senate, that’s gotten harder
to do. And Jeffords now gives him high marks for his fight against
terrorism, but the Senator has no regrets about what he did. Quite the
Jeffords: "I’ve never felt better about
myself. I’d never felt better in my life about anything, that I had done
something really to help this country."
George H.W. Bush, the man who lost much
conservative support when he broke his no new taxes pledge, the man who
pushed expansion of liberal environmental regulations, the man who named
an NEA Director who infuriated conservatives, the man whose policies
prompted a conservative challenge from Pat Buchanan, was too far to the
Toward the beginning of the December 16 piece,
Wallace at least challenged Jeffords on why he condemned the current
President Bush when Bush made his positions clear during the campaign.
After running a soundbite of Jeffords saying he changed parties because he
disagrees with Bush on "choice," the environment, education,
taxes and missile defense, Wallace asked: "You heard the President
during the campaign. Those were his positions. So why were you surprised
when he followed through?"
Jeffords lamely responded: "Well, I
shouldn’t have been, I guess, in that sense."
Wallace: "But months after running for
re-election as a Republican you left the party. Why should Vermonters who
voted for you trust you?"
Jeffords: "Because they know that the
parties in Vermont are very weak, that the large plurality of people are
independent. That’s why I picked the title of independent rather than
switching to Democrat to represent Vermont."
of the media can tag conservatives as "extremists" without
anyone questioning it, but on Sunday’s Late Edition when OMB Director
Mitch Daniels denounced "tax and spend extremists in the Democratic
Senate caucus," CNN’s Wolf Blitzer was flummoxed by the bizarre
notion: "‘Tax and spend extremists’ in the Democratic
On the December 16 Late Edition, Blitzer
inquired of Daniels: "You just heard the Senate Majority Leader Tom
Daschle say he wants a deal, he wants a deal with the Republicans, with
the White House this week but you have to give him, show him some
flexibility on all these big tax cuts you’re proposing for the huge
Daniels replied: "The President’s been the
only one showing flexibility right along Wolf, and has been calling for
stimulus for a couple of months now and the time really is here to act.
Senator Daschle’s got a tough job. In order to maintain his leadership
position he’s got to retain the support of some tax and spend extremists
in the Democratic Senate caucus, people for whom taxes can’t be high
enough and we can never spend too much government money, so he’s in a
delicate position. But now’s the time to prove that he’s a leader.
There is majority support, first of all in the country -- the Wall Street
Journal poll has two-to-one margin for the kind of balanced package the
President has proposed -- and there’s majority support in the Senate for
that kind of package if it will be allowed to come to a vote."
Blitzer was befuddled: "‘Tax and spend
extremists’ in the Democratic Party? Give us some names. Who are you
Daniels, smartly, avoided the bait.
weekend talk shows, journalists Eleanor Clift, Al Hunt, Margaret Carlson
and Nina Totenberg all criticized President Bush’s decision to have the
U.S. withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty in order to pursue
missile defense. But, as she denounced missile defense herself, NPR’s
Nina Totenberg complained about how "conservative Republicans have a
total knee-jerk thing about SDI. They cannot get over it."
If that’s true it’s just as accurate to
say liberal crusaders in the guise of journalists just can’t get over
their knee-jerk opposition to it.
-- Newsweek contributing editor and reporter
Eleanor Clift on the McLaughlin Group: "What it does is is probably
set off an arms race in China and Southern Asia of countries who will want
to have nuclear capability. And second, it’s not a proud thing for a
superpower to walk away from a treaty. This is the first since World War
II of this kind of behavior. Thirdly, where is the money? This is billions
of dollars and the latest test of the booster rocket just failed this
week. This is fantasy technology."
-- Al Hunt, Wall Street Journal Executive
Washington Editor, on CNN’s Capital Gang on Saturday night: "The
President might be right, the architecture that we had before may be
antiquated. But I'm not quite sure Colin Powell is right when he says that
it's not going to lead to any kind of nuclear proliferation. I mean, the
Russians -- he's right about the Russians, but the Chinese clearly say
that they're going to increase the number of offensive weapons. Then the
Indians too, then the Pakistanis too.
"There is a question of how cost-effective
it is. It's going to cost a lot of money, as Bob said. He may have to give
up some of his tax cuts because of that. There was a, you know, one of the
tests failed in the Pacific just this week.
"And finally: Is that the threat? I mean, I
don't think a missile defense is going to help us stop a single 767 from
going into a building; it's not going to stop a single anthrax from being
put in the mail; or it's not going to stop the threat of a chemical weapon
at the Winter Olympics. That may be the threat."
-- Time reporter and columnist Margaret
Carlson, also on CNN’s Capital Gang: "It may work eventually,
maybe. But to, you know, Russia can swamp anything the missile defense
fund, I mean, the missile defense shield can do. So of course Putin says,
well, it's no threat, because it might not be. Because he can come up with
more things to defeat it. And surely China is going to start building more
nuclear weapons as much as it can. And then you're going to have more
nuclear materials floating around at a time when you don't want rogue
states to be able to get ahold of it because the threat is from rogue
states and terrorism. And this does absolutely nothing to cope with what
we know about since 9/11."
-- On Inside Washington, NPR reporter Nina
Totenberg saw a knee-jerk reaction not from her media colleagues but from
conservatives: "I don’t think the problem is as much the Russians
as it is maybe the world and, I’ll jerk Charles’s [Krauthammer] chain,
a certain sense of unilateralism. But even more, I just think conservative
Republicans have a total knee-jerk thing about SDI. They cannot get over
it. We have other things that are much more likely bad to happen to us
that we should be spending money on."
of just accurately reporting that President Bush had decided to have the
U.S. withdraw from the ABM treaty, on Thursday night the NBC News team
nefariously characterized the move as one in which Bush "deliberately
broke a treaty" and which had the U.S. "deliberately going back
on its word."
Tom Brokaw set up a December 13 NBC Nightly
News story: "Today President Bush deliberately broke a treaty with
Russia, as he promised he would -- the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
that bars both countries from building a missile defense system. Without a
defense, both sides are vulnerable, and that's a deterrent. But President
Bush says times and threats have changed."
Later, MRC Communications Director Liz Swasey
noticed, Brian Williams plugged the same story on his MSNBC show, The News
with Brian Williams, by announcing: "When we come back, the other big
news from the White House today. President Bush makes a major
announcement. Tonight, why the U.S. is deliberately going back on its word
in front of the rest of the world."
By contrast, the ABC and CBS anchors managed
to relay the same decision sans the derogatory spin. ABC’s Peter
Jennings reported: "President Bush formally notified the Soviet Union
today the US will withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty so
the U.S. can proceed with building a missile defense system. Mr. Bush said
today it was part of the war against terrorists. The Russians say it's a
mistake because it disrupts long-standing arms control agreements."
Over on the December 13 CBS Evening News, Dan
Rather stated: "After many signals that he intended to pull out of
the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Moscow, President Bush made it
official today. The United States will withdraw from the treaty in six
months, clearing the way for missile defense testing banned by the treaty.
Russia's President Vladimir Putin called the Bush decision a
isn’t liberal enough for World News Tonight/Sunday anchor Carole
Simpson. In a PBS show to air Tuesday night, USA Today reported, she will
bemoan how the elimination of the "American Agenda" segment on
the weekday World News Tonight means "it's kind of a depressing time
right now. I don't think we are fulfilling what I always thought was our
historic role, which was to afflict the comfortable and comfort the
In a December 13 story, USA Today’s Peter
Johnson previewed She Says: Women in News: "ABC News anchor Carole
Simpson used to like reporting ‘America Agenda’ segments on World News
Tonight because they allowed her to talk about issues such as domestic
abuse, rape and poverty.
"But ‘Agenda’ is no longer on ABC News'
agenda, Simpson bemoans Tuesday on She Says/Women in News (PBS 9 p.m.
"Instead, ABC and other networks ‘have
gone to focus groups. We have found out that people are suffering
compassion fatigue,’ Simpson says. ‘So it's kind of a depressing time
right now. I don't think we are fulfilling what I always thought was our
historic role, which was to afflict the comfortable and comfort the
afflicted. We don't do much of that anymore.’
"Simpson is among 10 top women in print and
television who discuss the changes and hurdles they've faced in a business
that was once a men's club."
Amongst the other women profiled: CNN's Judy
Back in 1994, on CNBC’s Equal Time, Simpson
boasted that the "American Agenda" segments were not neutral as
she contended that viewers wanted their thinking to be nudged along:
"I won’t make any pretense that the American Agenda is totally
neutral. We do take a position. And I think the public wants us now to
take a position. If you give both sides and ‘Well, on the one hand this
and on the other that’ -- I think people kind of really want you to help
direct their thinking on some issues."
She Says: Women in News is on the PBS national
schedule for Tuesday night, December 18. In the Washington, DC area, the
one-hour show will air at 9pm on WETA-TV and at 10pm on Maryland Public
week left for you to benefit from the special discount for CyberAlert
subscribers for the MRC’s "Dishonor Awards: Roasting the Most
Outrageously Biased Liberal Reporters of the Year." Tickets are
priced at $150, but as a CyberAlert subscriber you can save $15 per ticket
and pay just $135.
This will be a reprise of the very fun and
popular Dishonor Awards we presented in late 1999. The winners will be
announced "Oscar-style," with video clips of the top nominees,
at a dinner presentation at the Ronald Reagan International Trade Center
in Washington, DC on Thursday, January 17 at 7pm.
Cal Thomas will serve as Master of Ceremonies.
Presenters include Steve Forbes and Kate O’Beirne. A media victim will
accept each award in jest. Winning quotes will be selected by a panel of
well-known media observers. Robert Novak and Sean Hannity have already
returned their ballots. Award categories include: "We’re All Going
to Die and It’s Bush’s Fault Award for Doomsday Environmental
Reporting" and the "Peter Arnett Award for Hopelessly Foolish
Wartime Reporting." Plus: "The Gilligan Award for the Flakiest
Comment of the Year."
To see what you missed in 1999, go to:
Tables of ten are available to CyberAlert
subscribers for $1300, $50 off the regular price.
Take advantage of your preferred status as a
CyberAlert subscriber and order soon. The discount offer will end on
I hope to see many of you on January 17, at
what is sure to again be a fun and entertaining evening mocking the most
outrageous liberal and/or foolish comments of the year from members of the