top


The 2,817th CyberAlert. Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996
8:50am EST, Tuesday February 3, 2009 (Vol. Fourteen; No. 23)
Back To Today's CyberAlert | Free Subscription

1. ABC Indicates Successful, Safe Election Means 'End' to Iraq War
An epochal media moment Monday night on ABC's World News? In an upbeat story about the election in Iraq "with virtually no violence," reporter Jim Sciutto raised the possibility the war is now over -- just in time to enable President Barack Obama to fulfill his promise to reduce troop levels -- as Sciutto asked a member of Iraq's parliament: "Is this the end of the war?" Mahmoud Othman cautiously predicted: "If the Iraqi leaders could get together and work together sincerely, yes, this could be the end of the war."

2. Lauer to Obama: Are You Worried About a Gitmo 'Willie Horton?'
In a portion of Matt Lauer's interview with Barack Obama not aired before the Super Bowl, but aired on Monday's Today show, Lauer asked the President about the release of a Guantanamo prisoner coming back to haunt him. However Lauer couched the question in not public safety, but political terms, as he asked the President: "If one of those people that's released goes back and takes part in the planning of, or carrying out of, an attack against U.S. interests, you're gonna have a Willie Horton times 100 situation." In other words Lauer bypassed asking how upset the President would be if a released Guantanamo prisoner killed U.S. citizens, and went right to how worried Obama would be if Republicans made a Willie Horton like ad, featuring the terrorist, to hurt him politically.

3. ABC's Sawyer to McCain: 'Are You Offended' by Rush Limbaugh?
Good Morning America host Diane Sawyer on Monday repeatedly pressed Senator John McCain to attack Rush Limbaugh's assertion that he hopes Barack Obama's liberal policies fail. After playing a selectively edited clip that implied racial overtones and left out all context of what the radio host meant, Sawyer challenged: "Are you offended by what he said?" A few seconds earlier, editing together two separate clips of Limbaugh, the GMA host played a misleading, racially-suggestive soundbite of the conservative star: "[From January 16 on radio] I don't need 400 words. I need four. I hope he fails. [From Fox News January 21 interview.] We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds. Because his father was black. Because this is the first black president. We've got to accept this."

4. Vanity Fair's Maureen Orth Cheers Obama's Cabinet on Today
NBC's Matt Lauer invited Vanity Fair's Maureen Orth on Monday's Today show to promote her magazine's cover story on Barack Obama and the special correspondent celebrated the new President's incoming Cabinet as she cheered: "They have big plans to green the economy. The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Interior say, 'This is our moon shot.'" The easily impressed Orth then went on to say government is back in vogue as she crowed: "If you noticed the last eight years...the conservative philosophy is that governs best which governs least. And now people feel it's more of a time for government to intervene and so they can start trying things."

5. After Being Dead Wrong, NYT's DeParle Hits Welfare Reform Again
Veteran New York Times reporter Jason DeParle criticized welfare reform on Monday's front page, but has opposed it from the start: In 1996 he accused Bill Clinton of "seeking re-election with a bill that begrudges poor infants their Pampers." DeParle garnered Monday's lead story slot with an investigation into how the U.S. welfare system, which went through enormous changes in 1996 after President Clinton signed a bill replacing cash entitlement with work requirements and time limits, is functioning state by state during tough economic times ("Welfare Aid Failing to Grow as Economy Lags)."


 

ABC Indicates Successful, Safe Election
Means 'End' to Iraq War

     An epochal media moment Monday night on ABC's World News? In an upbeat story about the election in Iraq "with virtually no violence," reporter Jim Sciutto raised the possibility the war is now over -- just in time to enable President Barack Obama to fulfill his promise to reduce troop levels -- as Sciutto asked a member of Iraq's parliament: "Is this the end of the war?" Mahmoud Othman cautiously predicted: "If the Iraqi leaders could get together and work together sincerely, yes, this could be the end of the war."

     Anchor Charles Gibson set up the story by asserting the Saturday elections "mark a major turning point in the Iraqi effort to move forward and the U.S. desire to pull back." Sciutto began with a woman who agreed with his premise "Iraq is ready to move on without the Americans." Sciutto described how "almost every day there's another handover from American to Iraqi authority" and that "it was Iraqi soldiers who kept polling stations remarkably safe" while check points "used to be manned by American soldiers. Today, they are almost exclusively Iraqi security forces."

     [This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Monday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

     Transcript of the piece on the Monday, February 2 World News on ABC:

     CHARLES GIBSON: Overseas next, to Iraq, where it will take several days before results are in from Saturday's provincial elections. Just over half of the eligible voters turned out for the election which mark a major turning point in the Iraqi effort to move forward and the U.S. desire to pull back. Here's our senior foreign correspondent, Jim Sciutto.

     JIM SCIUTTO: As Iraqis voted to decide their future, it was clear many were also putting America in the past. More confident in their leaders and themselves.
     SCIUTTO TO HIBA AL-YASSIN: Do you think Iraq is ready to move on without the Americans?
     HIBA AL-YASSIN, IRAQI VOTER: I think, yeah, Iraq is ready.
     SCIUTTO: Are you ready as well?
     AL-YASSIN: I am ready as well.
     SCIUTTO: Already, almost every day there's another handover from American to Iraqi authority. Today, it was one of the joint security stations set up during the troop surge.
     LT. COLONEL MONTY WILLOUGHBY, 10th CALVARY, U.S. ARMY: Now it's time to give this facility back to its rightful owner.
     SCIUTTO: It was Iraqi soldiers who kept polling stations remarkably safe during Saturday's elections with virtually no violence. U.S. commanders monitored via surveillance cameras. The Iraqi air force is flying again. And the Green Zone, a reviled symbol of the occupation, is now in Iraqi hands.
     Across the capital, check points like this one used to be manned by American soldiers. Today, they are almost exclusively Iraqi security forces. Even reconstruction projects are increasingly paid for by the Iraqi government. Except for a handful of operations, U.S. troops are retreating from city centers. And they're operating with Iraqi permission and under Iraqi rules, such as a 24-hour limit on detaining suspects.
     MAJOR MIKE SOLIS, 9th DIVISION, MITT TEAM: Really, it's the Iraqi army, the Iraqi security forces and the government of Iraq that are in the lead here.
     SCIUTTO: Iraqis are now openly discussing a once distant prospect.
     SCIUTTO TO MAHMOUD OTHMAN: Is this the end of the war?
     MAHMOUD OTHMAN, IRAQI PARLIAMENT MEMBER: If the Iraqi leaders could get together and work together sincerely, yes, this could be the end of the war.
     SCIUTTO: The end of the war here?
     OTHMAN: Could be.
     SCIUTTO: For the U.S., a different kind of relationship with Iraq, less protector than ally. Jim Sciutto, ABC News, Baghdad.

 

Lauer to Obama: Are You Worried About
a Gitmo 'Willie Horton?'

     In a portion of Matt Lauer's interview with Barack Obama from the White House not aired before the Super Bowl, but aired on Monday's Today show, Lauer asked the President about the release of a Guantanamo prisoner coming back to haunt him. However Lauer couched the question in not public safety, but political terms, as he asked the President: "If one of those people that's released goes back and takes part in the planning of, or carrying out of, an attack against U.S. interests, you're gonna have a Willie Horton times 100 situation." In other words Lauer bypassed asking how upset the President would be if a released Guantanamo prisoner killed U.S. citizens, and went right to how worried Obama would be if Republicans made a Willie Horton like ad, featuring the terrorist, to hurt him politically.

     [This item, by the MRC's Geoffrey Dickens, was posted Monday morning on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

     The following exchange was aired in the 7am half hour of the February 2 Today show:

     MATT LAUER: Let me go on quickly, if I can, to some other subjects. You signed an executive order in your first week, that says you'll close the military detention center at Guantanamo within a year. So the clock is ticking. And already you've heard the criticism that you don't know what you're gonna do with the 245 prisoners being held there?
     BARACK OBAMA: It's the right thing to do, ultimately it will make us safer. You've already seen in the reaction around the world, a different sense of America by us taking this action.
     LAUER: Some of these people may be released.
     OBAMA: Yeah.
     LAUER: The ones that seem to be less of a threat. But if one of those people that's released goes back and takes part in the planning of, or carrying out of, an attack against U.S. interests, you're gonna have a Willie Horton times 100 situation, on your hands. How are you gonna deal with that?
     OBAMA: Of course I'm worried about it. Look the, the, you know I have to make the very best judgments I can make in terms of what's gonna keep the American people safe. And is what, what's gonna uphold our Constitution and our traditions of due process. If we don't uphold our Constitution and our values, that over time, that will make us less safe. And that will be a recruitment tool for organizations like al-Qaeda. That's what I've got do keep my eye on.

     To read about Lauer's interview with Obama aired right before the Super Bowl see the February 2 CyberAlert item, "Lauer Empathizes with Obama Over 'Sobering' Intel Briefings," at: www.mrc.org

 

ABC's Sawyer to McCain: 'Are You Offended'
by Rush Limbaugh?

     Good Morning America host Diane Sawyer on Monday repeatedly pressed Senator John McCain to attack Rush Limbaugh's assertion that he hopes Barack Obama's liberal policies fail. After playing a selectively edited clip that implied racial overtones and left out all context of what the radio host meant, Sawyer challenged: "Are you offended by what he said?"

     A few seconds earlier, editing together two separate clips of Limbaugh, the GMA host played a misleading, racially-suggestive soundbite of the conservative star: "[From January 16 on radio] I don't need 400 words. I need four. I hope he fails. [From Fox News January 21 interview.] We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds. Because his father was black. Because this is the first black president. We've got to accept this." (More on the selective editing in a CNSNews.com post, "Rush Limbaugh Wants Obama to 'Fail' for Racial Reasons, ABC's Diane Sawyer Suggests," at: www.cnsnews.com )

     [This item, by the MRC's Scott Whitlock, was posted Monday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

     Sawyer then challenged the former GOP presidential nominee. "So, he says he hopes the Obama presidency fails. What do you say to Rush Limbaugh," she wondered. McCain refused to take the bait and simply asserted that all Americans hope the President can get the economy moving. Not getting the answer Sawyer was looking for, the journalist followed up: "One more try here. But, do you hope the President succeeds?" The GMA host closed out the line of questioning by pressing McCain as to whether he was "offended" by Limbaugh. The Arizona Senator also appeared on CBS's The Early Show and was asked no such question.

     In contrast to the conservative radio host, Sawyer offered McCain just one question on Tom Daschle, Obama's Health and Human Services nominee. Daschle is under fire for owing three years and $140,000 of back taxes. (He's since paid them.) The ABC host simply queried: "The Senate is getting ready to consider in earnest the tax problems of former Senator Daschle who is going to be nominated for the vital issues of health care. Have his apologies satisfied you? Would you vote for him?" She certainly didn't wonder if McCain was offended by Daschle's failure to pay taxes. (Reporter Jake Tapper did cover this story in another segment, but this was the only question Sawyer offered on the subject.)

     A transcript of the February 2 segment, which aired at 7:10am:

     DIANE SAWYER: Just a few moments ago we were joined by a major Republican player in the stimulus package and, of course, in the loyal opposition, as he says, Senator John McCain of Arizona. And good morning, Senator McCain. Great to have you with us again. And, oh, it was close last night. It was so close.
     SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: They came- yeah, I was very proud of them and very proud of the way they came back and you've got to hand it to a Pittsburgh team who pulled a rabbit out of the hat. But it was a great game and everything that everybody wanted except for victory for us Cardinals fans.
     SAWYER: There's always another year. There will be another year. Well, I want to turn to the news of the day as we know. The Senate is getting ready to consider in earnest the tax problems of former Senator Daschle who is going to be nominated for the vital issues of health care. Have his apologies satisfied you? Would you vote for him?
     MCCAIN: It hasn't, quote, satisfied me. I just think we need to find out more information, his relationship with Mr. Henry, what he did for the millions of dollars and why it is that he didn't report a great deal of income in taxes. But I'd like to wait and see for all the facts to come out before I make a decision. I think we'll know that in the next couple of days.
     SAWYER: Turning on to the stimulus package, you have come out against the current form of the package and also have said you don't think the administration has been collaborative enough with the Republicans. Have you called the President to express to him what you think should be in that bill?
     MCCAIN: Well, the President met with both House and Senate and that was- House and Senate Republicans and I think that was a very important gesture and very helpful in establishing the climate. But in the House and in the Senate, the Democrats really didn't negotiate at all with the Republicans. We have got to have a truly bipartisan approach. I think the President can and will lead in negotiations to eliminate so many billion, tens of billions of unnecessary and non-stimulative projects. They are- this is a spending bill. This is the spending projects that frankly the more liberal members of Congress who have wanted to spend for a long time. It doesn't cut payroll taxes. It doesn't cut business taxes. It doesn't have a provision for when we start reducing this deficit.
     SAWYER: Another big issue in the news and out there on the internet, of course, is Rush Limbaugh who basically says that Republicans have got to take sides and here was the question that he posed. Here is the challenge he posed.
     RUSH LIMBAUGH: [From radio] I don't need 400 words. I need four. I hope he fails. [From Fox News interview.] We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds. Because his father was black. Because this is the first black president. We've got to accept this.
     SAWYER: So he says he hopes the Obama presidency fails. What do you say to Rush Limbaugh?
     MCCAIN: I hope that all of us as Americans can succeed in getting a package that will get this economy going, put millions of people back into jobs again and that we can all work together to do so without betraying our fundamental principles of our Republican Party, which is lower taxes, spending under control, fiscal responsibility and a high regard for the taxpayers' dollars.
     SAWYER: One more try here. But, do you hope the president succeeds?
     MCCAIN: I hope we all succeed working together. That's what the American people want us to do and if the President gets the credit for it, fine. I'll give it to him. What I want to do is work to get this country back on its feet again. This is terrible, Diane. I don't have to tell you or anybody watching how tough this situation is. That's when we have to act together.
     SAWYER: Are you offended by what he said?
     MCCAIN: Oh, listen, I think the important thing for us to do right now is to sit down and work together. Mr. Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion. I respect it as I do many other commentators on the issues of the day.
     SAWYER: And before we let you go, can't help but note it is great to have you back with us. I just wonder now looking back at the campaign, what's the last thought you had about the race for the presidency?
     MCCAIN: That I was proud of the campaign we ran. I lost to a very good candidate and I wish him every success because we need leadership now that the American people can get behind and two wars, tough economy And I'm proud of the campaign we ran and I'm sure we made many mistakes, Diane. But I'm proud of the people that supported us and the way we conducted the campaign and I'm honored and humbled to have had the opportunity to compete for the presidency of the greatest nation in the world.
     SAWYER: Thank you, Senator McCain. Come often.

 

Vanity Fair's Maureen Orth Cheers Obama's
Cabinet on Today

     NBC's Matt Lauer invited Vanity Fair's Maureen Orth on Monday's Today show to promote her magazine's cover story on Barack Obama and the special correspondent celebrated the new President's incoming Cabinet as she cheered: "They have big plans to green the economy. The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Interior say, 'This is our moon shot.'" The easily impressed Orth then went on to say government is back in vogue as she crowed: "If you noticed the last eight years...the conservative philosophy is that governs best which governs least. And now people feel it's more of a time for government to intervene and so they can start trying things."

     [This item, by the MRC's Geoffrey Dickens, was posted Monday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

     The following exchange was aired during the 8am half hour of this morning's Today show:

     MATT LAUER: You got to talk to several members of this group. Before we talk about them as individuals, as a group, what struck you?
     MAUREEN ORTH: Well that they're not intimidated by the tasks ahead and they're very idealistic. They feel that they've been elected, the President was elected for change. And they have big plans to green the economy. The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of the Interior say, "This is our moon shot." Larry Summers, who is the president of the council, President's council of economic advisors says, "This is a once in a generation chance for economic policy-makers."
     LAUER: Yeah that's interesting. That's interesting because so many people look at the recession right now, that is deepening, and they say, they wring their hands and they say, "This is just an insurmountable challenge." And here's Larry Summers saying, "Wait a second, no. Let's look at this as the glass half-full. Let's look at as a chance to really make a mark."
     ORTH: Right, I think there are so many things, if you noticed the last eight years, the, the conservative philosophy is that governs best which governs least. And now people feel it's more of a time for government to intervene and so they can start trying things. And of course there's a lot of infrastructure that needs to be updated. There's Internet that needs to be spread. I mean there are so many things and educational reform. There are many, many things that need to be done.

 

After Being Dead Wrong, NYT's DeParle
Hits Welfare Reform Again

     Veteran New York Times reporter Jason DeParle criticized welfare reform on Monday's front page, but has opposed it from the start: In 1996 he accused Bill Clinton of "seeking re-election with a bill that begrudges poor infants their Pampers." DeParle garnered Monday's lead story slot with an investigation into how the U.S. welfare system, which went through enormous changes in 1996 after President Clinton signed a bill replacing cash entitlement with work requirements and time limits, is functioning state by state during tough economic times ("Welfare Aid Failing to Grow as Economy Lags)."

     But DeParle might not be the most objective teller of this particular tale -- his reporting has always been opposed to the welfare reform bill pushed by the GOP and signed by Clinton. At the time, he called it "a bill that begrudges poor infants their Pampers" and warned of more homelessness, drug use, prostitution, and abortions, none of which came to pass.

     [This item, by Clay Waters, was posted Monday on the MRC's TimesWatch site: www.timeswatch.org ]

     DeParle doesn't acknowledge that in his story, which began:

Despite soaring unemployment and the worst economic crisis in decades, 18 states cut their welfare rolls last year, and nationally the number of people receiving cash assistance remained at or near the lowest in more than 40 years.

The trends, based on an analysis of new state data collected by The New York Times, raise questions about how well a revamped welfare system with great state discretion is responding to growing hardships.

....

The deepening recession offers a fresh challenge to the program, which was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 amid bitter protest and became one of the most closely watched social experiments in modern memory.

The program, which mostly serves single mothers, ended a 60-year-old entitlement to cash aid, replacing it with time limits and work requirements, and giving states latitude to discourage people from joining the welfare rolls. While it was widely praised in the boom years that followed, skeptics warned it would fail the needy when times turned tough.

Supporters of the program say the flat caseloads may reflect a lag between the loss of a job and the decision to seek help. They also say the recession may have initially spared the low-skilled jobs that many poor people take.

But critics argue that years of pressure to cut the welfare rolls has left an obstacle-ridden program that chases off the poor, even when times are difficult.

Even some of the program's staunchest defenders are alarmed.

     SUSPEND Excerpt

     Later, DeParle uncovered excuses for welfare reform's success:

Born from Mr. Clinton's pledge to "end welfare as we know it," the new program brought furious protests from people who predicted the poor would suffer. Then millions of people quickly left the rolls, employment rates rose and child poverty plunged.

But the economy of the late 1990s was unusually strong, and even then critics warned that officials placed too much stress on caseload reduction. With benefits harder to get, a small but growing share of families was left with neither welfare nor work and fell deeper into destitution.

     END of Excerpt

     The February 2 article: www.nytimes.com

     DeParle sprinkled his story with labeling bias, as two liberal pro-welfare groups, the Center for Public Policy Priorities in Austin and the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington, were simply called "research and advocacy" groups, while the center-left Brookings Institution received no label. Yet pro-reform Robert Rector was described (in paragraph 39 of the 40-paragraph story) as "an analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Washington who is influential with conservative policy makers."

     DeParle feared the passage of Clinton-era welfare reform back in 1996. In his July 28, 1996 Times Week in Review story "Get a Job -- The New Contract With America's Poor," DeParle warned:

The risk is that it may also end poverty as we know it. By making it even worse....But the weight of the evidence suggests that most either cannot or will not lift themselves from poverty in an economy where, for more than two decades, the bottom has been dropping out for low-skilled workers. In a nation that already has the highest child poverty rates in the industrialized world the poor may indeed get poorer. And more numerous and desperate as well...If he signs the measure as it is, President Clinton will appear to have fulfilled his famous pledge about ending welfare. In truth, he will have abandoned the vision that animated the slogan. Having sought office with the aim of a redefined social contract -- health care for every American -- he will be seeking re-election with a bill that begrudges poor infants their Pampers....No doubt the harsh reality of an empty stomach will cause some people to do better. Some may indeed get jobs and marry, as [Fla. Rep. Clay] Shaw predicts. Others may turn to prostitution or the drug trade. Or cling to abusive boyfriends. Or have more abortions. Or abandon their children. Or camp out on the streets and beg.

     DeParle was not prescient, to put it mildly: For one, abortion rates continued to decline even after welfare reform was passed.

     1996 piece: query.nytimes.com

     For the latest on bias in the New York Times: www.timeswatch.org

-- Brent Baker

 


Sign up for CyberAlerts:
     Keep track of the latest instances of media bias and alerts to stories the major media are ignoring. Sign up to receive CyberAlerts via e-mail.

Subscribe!
Enter your email to join MRC CyberAlert today!

 

questions and comments about CyberAlert subscription

     You can also 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, go to: http://www.mrc.org/cybersub.asp#webnews

 


Home | News Division | Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts 
Media Reality Check | Notable Quotables | Contact the MRC | Subscribe

Founded in 1987, the MRC is a 501(c) (3) non-profit research and education foundation
 that does not support or oppose any political party or candidate for office.

Privacy Statement

Media Research Center
325 S. Patrick Street
Alexandria, VA 22314