top
|
1. Olbermann Blasts Rumsfeld as a 'Quack' Pushing 'Fascism' MSNBC's Keith Olbermann on Wednesday night used his Countdown show to deliver a vitriolic personal attack on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "a reality check of Donald Rumsfeld's incendiary speech, a special comment on his attack on your right to disagree." Olbermann concluded his program with a six-minute diatribe against Rumsfeld: "The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet." Olbermann equated the Bush administration with "the English government of Neville Chamberlain" which "knew that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated." The MSNBC star charged, "The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought." The U.S., Olbermann asserted before concluding with Edward R. Murrow's "we must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," now "faces a new type of fascism." 2. ABC on Katrina: White Conspiracy v. Black Conspiracy Theorists Near the end of Tuesday's World News with Charles Gibson, ABC's "A Closer Look" segment explored racial tensions in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Reporter Steve Osunsami recycled wild black conspiracy theories about how the levees were blown up in a racist plot, complete with a Spike Lee soundbite and documentary footage. Whites were said to be delighted that Katrina would make the city much whiter. Lance Hill, the Tulane University professor ABC selected to describe white opinion, has claimed the government ordered no food and water be distributed to Katrina victims, and spurred local Holocaust-survivor outrage by comparing the government's Katrina response to Hitler's Holocaust. ABC didn't explain any of that. 3. ABC's Raddatz: Katrina a 'Political Disaster'...Just for Bush On ABC's World News on Tuesday night, a story on President Bush's day in New Orleans aggressively underlined the liberal theme that the response to Hurricane Katrina is a scandalous, indelible black mark on Bush's legacy. Reporter Martha Raddatz told viewers "the slow response was indeed a political disaster for the President, from which he is still trying to recover." Raddatz ended the story with an anecdote about a waitress joking to Bush that he wasn't going to turn his back on her, and Bush reportedly replied: "No, ma'am, not again." 4. CNN's Cafferty: Big Oil Lowering Gas Prices to Help Republicans? Wednesday's USA Today reported that gasoline prices could be closer to $2 a gallon by Thanksgiving. The paper cited the end of the summer driving season and decreased demand as causes for this predicted decline. Not surprisingly, CNN's Jack Cafferty saw something more sinister at work. Before his daily "Cafferty File" segment during the 4pm EDT hour of The Situation Room on Wednesday afternoon, substitute anchor John King and news reader Zain Verjee discussed this report and cheered on lower gas prices as good news. Cafferty then spouted off the old liberal conspiracy theory connecting Republicans and Big Oil: "You know, if you were a real cynic, you could also wonder if the oil companies might not be pulling the price of gas down to help the Republicans get re-elected in the midterm elections a couple of months away." 5. Geraldo Advocates for 'Courageous' Illegal Immigrant On the August 28th edition of Fox's syndicated Geraldo At Large, Geraldo Rivera advocated for an illegal immigrant single-mother trying to fight deportation with the help of a Chicago church. The piece cast illegal immigration foes as almost heartless as Rivera asked Pat Buchanan: "Isn't it impossible almost, not to be sympathetic to this mom and her son?" and "Pat isn't it a kind of bait and switch? We lure the illegals here with the promise of work and now we're telling them, either leave or be arrested?" 6. Ex-CBS Reporter: Couric a 'Liberal...in Love With Hillary' According to a new biography of Dan Rather, one longtime CBSer -- no, not Rather himself -- believes what most CyberAlert and NewsBusters readers believe: Incoming CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric is in the tank for Hillary Clinton. In a Tuesday review for BloombergNews.com of Alan Weisman's book, Lone Star: The Extraordinary Life and Times of Dan Rather, Dave Shiflett revealed: "[f]ormer [CBS] congressional correspondent Phil Jones tells Weisman that Couric is 'a liberal Democrat who is so in love with Hillary Clinton' that it could pose a problem if Clinton runs for President." Olbermann Blasts Rumsfeld as a 'Quack' Pushing 'Fascism' MSNBC's Keith Olbermann on Wednesday night used his Countdown show to deliver a vitriolic personal attack on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, "a reality check of Donald Rumsfeld's incendiary speech, a special comment on his attack on your right to disagree." Olbermann concluded his program with a six-minute diatribe against Rumsfeld: "The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet." Olbermann equated the Bush administration with "the English government of Neville Chamberlain" which "knew that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated." The MSNBC star charged, "The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought." The U.S., Olbermann asserted before concluding with Edward R. Murrow's "we must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," now "faces a new type of fascism." Olbermann opened his hour by claiming that during a Tuesday speech before the American Legion convention, Rumsfeld "compared critics of the current war in Iraq to those who tried to appease Adolf Hitler and the Nazis before World War II." In fact, Rumsfeld simply worried about how not all realize how "we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism" from the Islamic world. Olbermann brought aboard DNC Chairman Howard Dean, proposing to him: "Is it, do you know, technically possible to impeach a Secretary of Defense and have we gotten to that stage after these remarks?" [This item was posted, with video, Wednesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org. The video will be added to the posted version of this CyberAlert, but in the meantime, to watch the Real or Windows Media clip, as well as the MP3 audio, go to: newsbusters.org ] For the text of Rumsfeld's August 29 speech to the American Legion convention in Salt Lake City, as posted by Defenselink.mil: www.defenselink.mil Wednesday night on the "Bloggerman" blog page for Keith Olbermann, MSNBC.com posted the full text of Olbermann's closing diatribe on the August 30 Countdown, his first blog posting since June 7: www.msnbc.msn.com The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet. Mr. Rumsfeld's remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis -- and the sober contemplation -- of every American. For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration's track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve. Dissent and disagreement with government is the life's blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as "his" troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq. It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong. In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld's speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril -- with a growing evil -- powerful and remorseless. That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld's, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the "secret information." It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld's -- questioning their intellect and their morality. That government was England's, in the 1930's. It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England. It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords. It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions -- its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed. The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the truth. Most relevant of all -- it "knew" that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused. That critic's name was Winston Churchill. Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill. History -- and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England -- have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty -- and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts. Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy. Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards. His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis. It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain. But back to today's Omniscient ones. That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely. And, as such, all voices count -- not just his. [Video clip linked above begins here:] Had he or his President perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience -- about Osama Bin Laden's plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein's weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina's impact one year ago -- we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their "omniscience" as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego. But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris. Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire "Fog of Fear" which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have -- inadvertently or intentionally -- profited and benefited, both personally, and politically. And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emperor's New Clothes? In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America? The confusion we -- as its citizensâ€" must now address, is stark and forbidding. But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart -- that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too. The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought. And about Mr. Rumsfeld's other main assertion, that this country faces a "new type of fascism." As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it. This country faces a new type of fascism -- indeed. Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow. But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: "confused" or "immoral." Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full: "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty," he said, in 1954. "We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. "We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular." And so good night, and good luck. END of Text of Olbermann's rant
ABC on Katrina: White Conspiracy v. Black Conspiracy Theorists Near the end of Tuesday's World News with Charles Gibson, ABC's "A Closer Look" segment explored racial tensions in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Reporter Steve Osunsami recycled wild black conspiracy theories about how the levees were blown up in a racist plot, complete with a Spike Lee soundbite and documentary footage. Whites were said to be delighted that Katrina would make the city much whiter. Lance Hill, the Tulane University professor ABC selected to describe white opinion, has claimed the government ordered no food and water be distributed to Katrina victims, and spurred local Holocaust-survivor outrage by comparing the government's Katrina response to Hitler's Holocaust. ABC didn't explain any of that. [This item, by Tim Graham, was posted Wednesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Charles Gibson introduced the August 29 segment with a worried tone about the lightening hue of what Mayor Ray Nagin called Chocolate City:
Osunsami: "Shortly after Katrina, the city of New Orleans enjoyed a relative peace on its streets. But in a few short months, the drug dealers and drive-by shootings returned."
Then came ABC's wild-eyed leftist expert on white opinion:
ABC left out a lot about Lance Hill's wild views on the Katrina response. In an August 22 op-ed on his Web page, Hill explained:
Hill pledged his allegiance to Spike Lee's conspiratorial vision, and insisted the United Nations should get involved: See: www.southerninstitute.info
ABC left out that local Holocaust survivor groups were outraged that Hill would propose an education program making a side-by-side comparison of the Katrina response with Hitler's Holocaust: Check: isurvived.org And: www.southerninstitute.info
Instead of explaining Hill's background, Osunsami merely moved on:
Then, fresh from the white professor's conspiracy theories, Osunsami turned to Spike Lee's black conspiracy theories: But just as Brian Williams and Matt Lauer spread the conspiracy theories without really attempting to decide whether they were inaccurate -- and indeed, that falsehoods should be passed along if victimized groups believe them -- ABC should be asked if the truth matters, or they are merely transmitters of people's feelings instead of facts. Osunsami and ABC ought to provide more skepticism than saying blacks "actually" believe the levees were bombed. If they are going to broadcast the charge, they should also refute the charge if it is inaccurate. With segments like these ABC is doing nothing to alleviate racial tensions, but only to exacerbate them.
ABC's Raddatz: Katrina a 'Political Disaster'...Just for Bush On ABC's World News on Tuesday night, a story on President Bush's day in New Orleans aggressively underlined the liberal theme that the response to Hurricane Katrina is a scandalous, indelible black mark on Bush's legacy. Reporter Martha Raddatz told viewers "the slow response was indeed a political disaster for the President, from which he is still trying to recover." Raddatz ended the story with an anecdote about a waitress joking to Bush that he wasn't going to turn his back on her, and Bush reportedly replied: "No, ma'am, not again." [This item, by Tim Graham, was posted Wednesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Anchorman Charles Gibson began the August 29 segment, the second story after a general recounting of how New Orleanians commemorated the one-year anniversary, with a brief mention of responsibility at all levels of government. But as usual, ABC had no time for the Democratic mayor or governor and their failures, even as Raddatz highlighted the Democratic senator slamming the federal response. Gibson theorized:
Over a graphic in capital letters reading "TAKING BLAME" sat underneath a picture of Bush at a podium, Raddatz continued: Over evocative photographs of suffering African-Americans, ABC ran a clip of Bush: "Citizens drowned in their attics. Desperate mothers crying out on national TV for food and water. The breakdown of law and order. And a government, at all levels, that fell short of its responsibilities. I take full responsibility for the federal government's response."
The President's somber contrition didn't gain him any traction with ABC, as they sought to blacken further his post-Katrina reputation. Raddatz did cite some of the White House claims, but then countered them with gloomy data:
Raddatz concluded the report on a split screen with Gibson: The ending should remind the public that writing a news story is very selective -- and liberal outlets loved the waitress story. (Raddatz left out Bush's laugh with the waitress, and the hug pictured in some newspapers.) If there is a political upside in Bush leading with his chin on Katrina, as he seemed to do in New Orleans, ABC wasn't offering it to him.
CNN's Cafferty: Big Oil Lowering Gas Prices to Help Republicans? Wednesday's USA Today reported that gasoline prices could be closer to $2 a gallon by Thanksgiving. The paper cited the end of the summer driving season and decreased demand as causes for this predicted decline. Not surprisingly, CNN's Jack Cafferty saw something more sinister at work. Before his daily "Cafferty File" segment during the 4pm EDT hour of The Situation Room on Wednesday afternoon, substitute anchor John King and news reader Zain Verjee discussed this report and cheered on lower gas prices as good news. Cafferty then spouted off the old liberal conspiracy theory connecting Republicans and Big Oil: "You know, if you were a real cynic, you could also wonder if the oil companies might not be pulling the price of gas down to help the Republicans get re-elected in the midterm elections a couple of months away." [This item, by Megan McCormack, was posted Wednesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters: newsbusters.org ]
Cafferty then went on to his question of the day: "Whom do you believe when it comes to whether Iraq has descended into civil war?" Again, it should come as no surprise, that Cafferty was just as cynical on that issue as he was about the falling gas prices:
Cafferty ended the segment the way he started it, with a sardonic view on falling gas prices: "The interesting thing to watch on that story about gas prices is what happens to them right after the midterms, John."
Geraldo Advocates for 'Courageous' Illegal Immigrant On the August 28th edition of Fox's syndicated Geraldo At Large, Geraldo Rivera advocated for an illegal immigrant single-mother trying to fight deportation with the help of a Chicago church. The piece cast illegal immigration foes as almost heartless as Rivera asked Pat Buchanan: "Isn't it impossible almost, not to be sympathetic to this mom and her son?" and "Pat isn't it a kind of bait and switch? We lure the illegals here with the promise of work and now we're telling them, either leave or be arrested?" Rivera noted the deportation stems from a 2002 arrest of her using a fake Social Security number but then tried to justify it by saying she paid the taxes: "One quick note about using a fake Social Security number. The tax is paid into the federal government but it's never paid out. So Elvira was paying taxes." Rivera then went further saying that some compare her "to Rosa Parks and other icons of the civil rights movement." [This item, by Geoff Dickens, was posted Wednesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Rivera opened Monday's show from the Chicago church: The following is a full transcript of the entire segment:
Rivera: "For more than two weeks this small storefront church on Chicago's West Side has been the epicenter of the emotional immigration debate. Before we meet the mother and child who've sought sanctuary in this holy place to avoid being deported as illegal aliens back to Mexico I'd like you to take a look at the background story that brought the mother and child here to the church. Elvira Arellano, a Mexican immigrant, single mother and a fugitive wanted by the U.S. government."
Ex-CBS Reporter: Couric a 'Liberal...in Love With Hillary' According to a new biography of Dan Rather, one longtime CBSer -- no, not Rather himself -- believes what most CyberAlert and NewsBusters readers believe: Incoming CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric is in the tank for Hillary Clinton. In a Tuesday review for BloombergNews.com of Alan Weisman's book, Lone Star: The Extraordinary Life and Times of Dan Rather, Dave Shiflett revealed: "[f]ormer [CBS] congressional correspondent Phil Jones tells Weisman that Couric is 'a liberal Democrat who is so in love with Hillary Clinton' that it could pose a problem if Clinton runs for President." [This item is adopted from a Wednesday NewsBusters posting by Tom Johnson: newsbusters.org ] It would appear that conservatives who read Lone Star will enjoy certain parts (Shiflett noted that in "Weisman's acerbic telling, [Walter Cronkite] is an arrogant blowhard 'who still believes that the anchor chair should have been retired with him in 1981'") far more than they'll enjoy others (in Shiflett's words, Weisman considers Memogate "a fairly minor error that sparked a gross overreaction").
For Shiflett's August 29 review, "Dan Rather Biographer Takes Shots at Hewitt, Moonves, Couric," go to: www.bloomberg.com
-- Brent Baker
Home | News Division
| Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts |
|