SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (593486)7/21/2004 2:50:33 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Respond to of 769670
 
That is fantastic. Wow the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth....

"The Democrats want Saddam back" and other Coulterisms

In her July 1 column, titled "Saddam In Custody -- Moore, Soros, Dean Still At Large," right-wing pundit Ann Coulter asserted, "[T]he Americanization of Iraq proceeds at an astonishing pace, the Iraqis are taking to freedom like fish to water. ... It's hard to say who's more upset about these developments: the last vestiges of pro-Hussein Baathist resistance in Iraq or John Kerry's campaign manager." Coulter's third paragraph? "The Democrats want Saddam back."
more...



To: stockman_scott who wrote (593486)7/22/2004 1:21:40 AM
From: tejek  Respond to of 769670
 
This is a CRITICAL site for exposing LIES and Fabrications...

Yes, we need it with all the lies FOX News puts out. Thanks.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (593486)7/22/2004 4:30:38 AM
From: PROLIFE  Respond to of 769670
 
John Kerry for President--of France!
Written by Burt Prelutsky
Thursday, July 22, 2004

The older I get, the less angry I get with politicians and the more annoyed I am with the rest of you. Barnum, I’m convinced, was right when he noted there’s a sucker born every minute. If anything, I’m afraid he underestimated the birth rate.

I mean, really, why do you people insist on fawning over politicians? You do realize, don’t you, that in their former lives they were all lawyers. How is it that everybody recognizes attorneys for the buzzards they are, but as soon as they head off to the state capitol or, worse yet, Washington, they’re regarded as somehow sanctified? As I see it, they’re the same shmoes they always were, they just don’t have to work such long hours or spend half their lives standing in line at the courthouse, shlepping around those enormous briefcases.



One of the myths that the hoi polloi swallow whole hog is that politicians are performing a great public service. This fable is especially popular when it comes to very wealthy politicians. You would think that people like Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards, Feinstein, and, yes, even Bush, were sacrificing themselves on funeral pyres for our sake.



Keep in mind that these folks are still enormously wealthy. None of them took a vow of poverty when they were sworn in; public office merely adds the aphrodisiacs of power and fame to their fortunes.



Another thing about your infatuation with these fat cats is that you all carry on as if the money they’re allocating to health, education, farm subsidies, etc., is coming out of their pocket. Nothing--I repeat, nothing--comes out of their pocket. And that includes travel, aides, protection, and even postage. On top of all that, they have long ago voted themselves the sort of pension and health plans the rest of us can only dream about.



It always kills me when some cluck – usually a Democrat – pushes through a trillion dollar entitlement program in Congress, and then takes bows as if he’s just written a personal check.



The fact of the matter is that a fellow like Kerry, if he really cared about the working stiff, would ask Teresa to liquidate her holdings in Heinz, a company that has most of its bottling plants outside the United States, and, with the billion dollar proceeds, start up a company that could employ thousands of Americans. But, no, like all the other sultans of the Senate, he’d rather revel in the glory to be derived from spending your tax dollars.



Rumor has it that Mrs. Kerry made John sign a pre-nup before she’d say, yes. It makes sense to me. I wouldn’t trust a liberal politician with my money, either, if the I.R.S. didn’t make me.



Speaking of Sen. Kerry, I don’t really enjoy knocking the guy. I mean, I give him all the credit in the world for making the most of his opportunities. Here’s a man who looks like he was born to be a mortician, but has nevertheless managed to snare not one, but two really rich wives. By his own admission, he committed war crimes, but he has managed to carve out a successful career in politics. He regards Jacques Chirac as a role model even though Chirac helped Saddam Hussein get a nuclear reactor and high grade plutonium a good 20 years before he argued against going to war against him because of French oil contracts, but in some circles Kerry even gets points for this.



The problem with Kerry isn’t that he speaks French, but that he thinks French. But, then, being essentially a gigolo who has risen above his station, why wouldn’t he?



If you really want to know why I despise John (''I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against the $87 billion'') Kerry, it’s because he will say absolutely anything if he thinks it will feather his war chest or garner him an additional vote in November.



For instance, at one of his fund raisers in New York City, the likes of Whoopi Goldberg and Billy Crystal spouted obscenities about President Bush, called him a thug and compared him to Hitler. When it was his turn to speak, Kerry praised all the infantile celebrities as great Americans! If that’s his idea of being a leader, I wouldn’t trust the guy to run a nursery school, let alone the nation.



A more recent example of the man’s lack of a moral center took place at the NAACP convention. Sen. Kerry vowed that, if elected, he wouldn’t divide America by race. From the reaction of the delegates, you’d have thought he was handing out reparation checks. The fact that they applauded him suggests that Kerry wasn’t the only hypocrite in the hall that evening, but merely the tallest. This is, after all, a group that divides the nation by race on a daily basis.



If that weren’t the case, wouldn’t the organization simply be called the NAAP?

chronwatch.com



To: stockman_scott who wrote (593486)7/22/2004 4:35:30 AM
From: PROLIFE  Respond to of 769670
 
1. CBS Shows More Concern for Timing Than Substance of Berger News

Every network but CBS led Tuesday night with the Sandy Berger tale of taking and then losing secret documents from the National Archives and resigning Tuesday from his advisory role with the Kerry campaign. Instead, Rather began: “Almost two a day. That is the rate American troops are dying in Iraq with the total now approaching 900 since the war began.” When he arrived at Berger he tried to discredit the story by insisting “this was triggered by a carefully orchestrated leak about Berger, and the timing of it appears to be no coincidence.” CBS’s John Roberts affirmed Bill Clinton’s praise for Berger by noting how “the 9/11 Commission agrees it got everything it wanted from Berger.” Roberts maintained: “Republicans and Democrats alike say the timing of the investigation’s disclosure smells like politics, leaked to the press just two days before the 9/11 Commission report comes out.”

2. Rather Reserves “Carefully Orchestrated Leak” to Items on Dems
Dan Rather reserves his “carefully orchestrated leak” formulation, to discredit revelations, to those stories harmful to Democrats. In addition to his introduction to the news about Sandy Berger, in June of 1998 Rather asserted that the "carefully orchestrated leaks" of Lewinsky tapes released earlier, which “were damaging to the Clinton camp, may not have told the whole story." Exactly two years later, on June 22, 2000, Rather set up a story about how “Vice President Gore is also on the spot tonight over a new, carefully orchestrated leak involving accusations about Gore's past campaign fundraising practices.” On the night Al Gore was set to address the Democratic convention in August of 2000, Rather intoned on the CBS Evening News: “Al Gore must stand and deliver here tonight as the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. And now Gore must do so against the backdrop of a potentially damaging, carefully orchestrated story leak about President Clinton.” Rather used the same formulation later during CBS’s prime time coverage but, in fact, the leak came from a Carter-appointed federal judge.

3. Newsweek’s Fineman: Democrats “Down the Middle” & “Moderate”
A preview of coverage next week? On Monday’s Hardball on MSNBC, Newsweek’s Howard Fineman insisted that the Democratic “message” is “down the middle,” reflecting a “moderate” platform.

4. CBS Complains Kerry Would Raise Minimum Wage “Only” to $7
CBS on Tuesday night framed the latest installment of their “What Does It Mean to You” series around how, as Dan Rather relayed, “many say no one can live” on the current minimum wage. Reporter Richard Schlesinger found a victim of the low minimum wage and assessed both candidates from the left, giving them failing grades for not advocating enough of a hike in it as he touted the fairness of a “living wage” ordinance enacted in Sante Fe, New Mexico. Schlesinger complained that “the federal minimum wage has been stuck at $5.15 for seven years. According to one report, had the minimum wage kept up with inflation every worker in the U.S. would now be guaranteed $8.49 an hour, almost exactly what the city of Santa Fe is telling employers here to pay. John Kerry would raise the minimum wage, but to only $7 by 2007.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



CBS Shows More Concern for Timing Than
Substance of Berger News

Every network but CBS led Tuesday night with the Sandy Berger tale of taking and then losing secret documents from the National Archives and resigning Tuesday from his advisory role with the Kerry campaign. Instead, Rather began: “Almost two a day. That is the rate American troops are dying in Iraq with the total now approaching 900 since the war began.” When he arrived at Berger he tried to discredit the story by insisting “this was triggered by a carefully orchestrated leak about Berger, and the timing of it appears to be no coincidence.” CBS’s John Roberts affirmed Bill Clinton’s praise for Berger by noting how “the 9/11 Commission agrees it got everything it wanted from Berger.” Roberts maintained: “Republicans and Democrats alike say the timing of the investigation’s disclosure smells like politics, leaked to the press just two days before the 9/11 Commission report comes out.”

Roberts attributed the pilfering to Berger’s “inadvertent” actions, but on the NBC Nightly News, while Pete Williams noted how Berger claimed he “accidentally discarded” some of the papers, Williams countered: “But government officials tell NBC News that archives employees claim it wasn’t so innocent, that they noticed documents were missing after day one. They say that when Berger came back they saw him stuffing papers into his clothing and by secretly marking the materials they concluded he took several separate drafts of the same 15-page document, a review ordered by Berger himself of the response to the millennium terror threats. Officials say it concluded the Clinton administration was not paying enough attention to foreign terrorists.”

Like CBS, ABC treated it as a big partisan dustup, but at least Jennings led World News Tonight with it and devoted a full story to the substance of the charges before recounting the politics of it. Jennings announced at the top of his July 20 program: “We’re going to start tonight with an FBI investigation that has set off a political firestorm today between Republicans and Democrats, which tells us, very clearly how deeply divided and outspoken politicians can be in the middle of a presidential campaign.”

Pierre Thomas outlined the case against Berger and how the archive staff saw Berger “stashing papers in his pockets” and that some papers may still be missing. Like Williams, he noted that “some of the information was apparently critical of Clinton’s anti-terror efforts.”

Jennings then reported: “This afternoon Sandy Berger resigned as an informal adviser to John Kerry’s campaign. His attorney said that Mr. Berger does not want any issue surrounding the 9/11 commission to be used for partisan purposes. Not a chance these days.”

Linda Douglass ran through how Republicans lined up to accuse Democrats of a cover up of failures in the Clinton years and then how Tom Daschle called the timing “curious” as Democrats argue that Republicans were just trying to shift attention away from Bush before the 9/11 Commission report is released. She concluded with how both parties are “scrambling to blame the other.”

None of the broadcast networks went as far as did CNN’s Kelli Arena on NewsNight. She relayed how “law enforcement sources say archives staff told investigators Berger stuffed the notes in his pants and jacket. Those sources also say one archives staffer told agents Berger also placed something in his socks, which Berger associates heatedly deny and there was no camera in the room.”

Like Tuesday’s Today on NBC, NewsNight brought aboard David Gergen to defend Berger. He praised Berger to CNN’s Aaron Brown: “He's one of the heroes in the war on terrorism in my book. Let me just say I think this has been blown way out of proportion and it is much more innocent than it looks. Let's get a couple of things very clear. In late 1999, as the millennium celebration approached, the United States had a lot of warnings that terrorists were about to strike. Sandy Berger went into a bunker for three or four nights, 24 hours a day practically, working with a team and they thwarted that terrorism, those attempted terrorist attacks. One of them was going to be to take out the Los Angeles Airport and there were other strikes intended. They stopped those attacks.”

Hmmm. I thought it was a border guard in Washington state who, without any guidance from DC, caught one of the millennium plotters.

Full rundown of July 20 CBS Evening News coverage:

Dan Rather opened his broadcast: “Good evening. Almost two a day. That is the rate American troops are dying in Iraq with the total now approaching 900 since the war began. Two Marines and two Army soldiers are the latest casualties, all killed in combat west of the capital in the last 25 hours.”

Following Kimberly Dozier on the release of the Filipino hostage and other activity in Iraq, Rather went to Lee Cowan for a look at how U.S. forces are stretched so thin that new soldiers are on Medicare. Cowan showcased 67 and 68 year old psychiatrists who have been called up to deal with the high suicide rate of soldiers in Iraq.

Rather soon arrived at the Berger story: “Sandy Berger, who was National Security Advisor under President Clinton, stepped aside today as an advisor to Senator John Kerry. CBS’s John Roberts reports this was triggered by a carefully orchestrated leak about Berger, and the timing of it appears to be no coincidence.”

Roberts began, as taken down by MRC analyst Brad Wilmouth: “Even as he testified before the 9/11 Commission, former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was under criminal investigation for removing several highly classified documents from the National Archives. Through his attorney, Berger today pled sloppiness.”
Lanny Breuer, attorney of Sandy Berger: “He’s not an organized guy. And when he was reviewing documents, he wasn’t particularly organized in his review of documents.”
Roberts: “It was on one of three trips to the archives last year to vet documents for the 9/11 Commission that Berger says he inadvertently put several highly classified draft intelligence reports into a leather portfolio he was carrying. But he does admit, against archives policy, he intentionally smuggled out of the archives handwritten notes he needed for his commission testimony hidden in his pocket. Republicans in both the Justice Department and Congress today accused Berger of stuffing his pants with classified data. In a statement, House Speaker Dennis Hastert blasted him for 'pilfering out nation’s most sensitive secrets.’ Nonsense, said Berger’s former boss today.”
Bill Clinton: “This thing’s been going on for months, and the 9/11 Commission has gone out of their way to try to talk about how forthcoming we were from the very beginning, giving all of the information.”
Roberts: “The 9/11 Commission agrees it got everything it wanted from Berger. And Republicans and Democrats alike say the timing of the investigation’s disclosure smells like politics, leaked to the press just two days before the 9/11 Commission report comes out.”
Eddie Mahe, Republican strategist: “Somebody is manipulating the process, I will say that categorically, for some agenda of some kind.”
Roberts: “Berger returned to the archives all but two of the documents, which he believes he accidentally threw away. An FBI search of his home in January turned up nothing, and late today law enforcement sources said they don’t expect any criminal charges will be filed.”



Rather Reserves “Carefully Orchestrated
Leak” to Items on Dems

Dan Rather reserves his “carefully orchestrated leak” formulation, to discredit revelations, to those stories harmful to Democrats. A review of the MRC archive and a cross-check with Nexis located four instances in the past six years or so in which Rather has applied the formulation and in every instance the disclosure was about a Democrat.

In addition to the news about Sandy Berger which Rather only reluctantly reported, as detailed in item #1 above, in June of 1998 Rather asserted that the "carefully orchestrated leaks" of Lewinsky tapes released earlier, which “were damaging to the Clinton camp, may not have told the whole story." Exactly two years later, on June 22, 2000, Rather introduced a story about how “Vice President Gore is also on the spot tonight over a new, carefully orchestrated leak involving accusations about Gore's past campaign fundraising practices.” On the night Al Gore was set to address the Democratic convention in August of 2000, Rather intoned on the CBS Evening News: “Al Gore must stand and deliver here tonight as the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. And now Gore must do so against the backdrop of a potentially damaging, carefully orchestrated story leak about President Clinton.” Rather used the same formulation later during CBS’s prime time coverage but, in fact, the leak came from a Carter-appointed federal judge.

Full quotations of those instances of how Rather framed the stories:

-- June 22, 1998 CBS Evening News. Rather: "It appears tonight that carefully orchestrated leaks of secretly recorded tapes of Monica Lewinsky, that were damaging to the Clinton camp, may not have told the whole story. Also today, weekend reports of what Lewinsky is or isn’t prepared to tell special prosecutor Ken Starr, may not be wholly accurate either. CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer is here with a reality and accuracy check for you."

Referring to a tape excerpt obtained by U.S. News, Bob Schieffer contended: "Now this conversation suggests that White House aides were trying to help Miss Lewinsky find a job long before Paula Jones’s lawyers were trying to track her down and question her under oath about her relationship with the President. This is significant because the independent counsel has been investigating whether the White House aides were trying to find those jobs for Miss Lewinsky as a reward for her denying that she had an affair with the President."

For more, see the June 23, 1998 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org

-- June 22, 2000 CBS Evening News. Rather: “Vice President Gore is also on the spot tonight over a new, carefully orchestrated leak involving accusations about Gore's past campaign fundraising practices. A Justice Department official is calling for an independent investigator in the case. CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer has the facts and the context on this.”

-- August 17, 2000 CBS Evening News, in a formulation he repeated during CBS's prime time convention coverage, Rather intoned: "Timing is everything. Al Gore must stand and deliver here tonight as the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. And now Gore must do so against the backdrop of a potentially damaging, carefully orchestrated story leak about President Clinton. The story is that Republican-backed special prosecutor Robert Ray, Ken Starr's successor, has a new grand jury looking into possible criminal charges against the president growing out of Mr. Clinton's sex life. CBS' Jim Stewart in Washington has that story and the context."

The next night Jim Stewart insisted: "Yesterday the White House, Democratic Party officials and just about everyone in Washington who follows politics were in agreement that it had to be a Republican that leaked the news that a new grand jury was looking into the Monica Lewinsky affair.” But, he conceded, “now, a federal judge has stepped forward and volunteered that he was the leak. And not only that, the judge was appointed by a Democrat." Jimmy Carter, in fact.

For more on CBS coverage of the matter, including an excerpt of Dan Rather’s online essay titled "Low-Road Politics: Clinton Grand Jury Leak Carefully Orchestrated," and for a RealPlayer video clip of Rather in high-dudgeon, see: www.mediaresearch.org

-- Four years later, Rather regurgitated his formulation, announcing on the July 20, 2004 CBS Evening News: “Sandy Berger, who was National Security Advisor under President Clinton, stepped aside today as an advisor to Senator John Kerry. CBS’s John Roberts reports this was triggered by a carefully orchestrated leak about Berger, and the timing of it appears to be no coincidence.” See item #1 for more.


mediaresearch.org



To: stockman_scott who wrote (593486)7/22/2004 4:36:38 AM
From: PROLIFE  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Dan Rather Disparages “Carefully Orchestrated Leak” That Upsets His Carefully Orchestrated Newscast

Sandy Berger’s Defense
Lawyers in the Press

It’s like the Clinton administration never ended. Once again, a Clinton aide is caught doing suspicious things with documents — “inadvertently” disposing of a few — and some national newscasters are making excuses for potentially criminal behavior, or changing the subject to identifying a vast partisan conspiracy at work.

Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s National Security Adviser during his second term, removed highly classified material from the National Archives, triggering a federal criminal investigation. When the story broke, some reporters protested the story’s timing.

CBS anchor Dan Rather insisted “this was triggered by a carefully orchestrated leak about Berger, and the timing of it appears to be no coincidence.” Reporter John Roberts found: “Republicans and Democrats alike say the timing of the investigation's disclosure smells like politics, leaked to the press just two days before the 9/11 Commission report comes out.”

The problem with Rather’s “carefully orchestrated leak” language is that he has no idea of the leaker or their orchestration. On August 17, 2000, Rather used the same phrase when it leaked on the night of Al Gore’s convention speech that a new grand jury would investigate Bill Clinton. Rather suggested a GOP dirty trick: “Timing is everything,” he began, and now Gore must speak “against the backdrop of a potentially damaging, carefully orchestrated leak about President Clinton.” The next night, CBS’s Jim Stewart noted “a judge appointed by a Democrat,” Jimmy Carter, was actually the leaker. Rather never apologized for his error.

ABC also portrayed the controversy last night as a “political firestorm between Republicans and Democrats,” but Pierre Thomas noted what CBS ignored: “some of the information [removed] was apparently critical of Clinton’s anti-terror efforts.” ABC’s Nightline, which often spotlights critics of Bush’s foreign policy, skipped Berger last night.

Today on Good Morning America, co-host Charlie Gibson interviewed George Stephanopoulos, who predicted “I think this is likely to blow over.” Gibson did not explain that George worked for years with Sandy Berger, or ask him questions based on that experience. ABC also failed to produce their consultant Richard Clarke, who wrote the document at the center of the probe.

NBC reporter Pete Williams noted Berger’s defenses, then balanced them: “Government officials tell NBC News that Archives employees say it wasn’t so innocent, that they noticed documents were missing after day one” and that the purloined pages suggest the Clinton team “was not paying enough attention to terrorism.” By contrast, Today has underlined Berger’s defense with soft interviews two days in a row. Yesterday, Katie Couric talked to Berger’s friend David Gergen. Today, Couric interviewed Berger’s defense lawyer, former Clinton aide Lanny Breuer. No Berger critics have been interviewed.

CNN’s NewsNight also featured Gergen last night, with his talk of Berger the “hero” of the war on terror. Reporter Kelli Arena went furthest in describing Archives employee claims that Berger shoved documents in his socks and pants. CNN also had a tough Wolf Blitzer Reports interview with Berger’s lawyer, with Blitzer insisting “Sandy Berger doesn’t do things inadvertently,” and asking: “How is it possible that this document so sensitive, which he took home, took to his office at his home, presumably, disappeared?” The other networks should ask that, too.

— Tim Graham and Brent Baker

mediaresearch.org