With the Presidential Debates just hours away, one of the campaigns is objecting to one of the debate rules.
The Kerry campaign is now objecting to the timing lights rule. The timing lights are used to alert the candidate and the viewing audience that a candidate has exceeded the time limit. If you watched any of the primary debates, this was a consistent problem for Kerry. On a couple of occasions, the candidate was stopped by the debate moderator.
The Kerry campaign called for an "emergency" meeting to discuss the issue. The Bush campaign declined to attend saying that the rules had been agreed to and would not change.
I guess Senator Kerry can say, "I agreed to the rules before I objected to them."
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Boycott CBS
There is a battle and the target is CBS News.
The website BoycottCBS.com is waging an all out battle against CBS News, Dan Rather, and advertisers. The site contains a petition, as well as, news about the inner workings of CBS and its liberal bias and coordination with the Kerry campaign and the DNC.
It is well worth a look.
BoycottCBS.com - Boycott CBS - Dan Rather peddles phony National Guard documents to smear President Bush
The website BoycottCBS.com is waging an all out battle against CBS News, Dan Rather, and advertisers. The site contains a petition, as well as, news about the inner workings of CBS and its liberal bias and coordination with the Kerry campaign and the DNC.
It is well worth a look.
BoycottCBS.com - Boycott CBS - Dan Rather peddles phony National Guard documents to smear President Bush
Jesse Jackson joins Kerry campaign=The Hill.com=
Here is something that the Kerry campaign does not need. The Rev, Jesse Jackson has joined the campaign as a senior adviser to John Kerry.
At one time, Jackson would have given a candidate, any candidate, a boost among black and minority voters. Now, Jackson is a shell of himself and mired in controversies of his own making. For example, after counseling Bill Clinton about his affair with Monica Lewinsky, it was discovered that Jackson had a child out of wedlock and had been paying the mother for many years out of Rainbow/PUSH Coalition funds.
Another example, Rainbow/Push received a Federal grant for $800,000 for a reading program in Chicago. Less than $50,000 was spent of any programs. Where's the rest? The Rev. Jess Jackson refuses to say or allow Federal auditors to look at the books. I also thought that when you receive a Federal grant it was required to participate in an audit of the project. I guess Jesse Jackson is exempt from Federal law.
These are only a couple of examples of Jesse Jackson's fleecing of his supporters. His leadership in the community has diminished and his alignment with the Kerry campaign will hurt Kerry, but will probably help Jackson.
Jesse Jackson joins Kerry campaign=The Hill.com=
At one time, Jackson would have given a candidate, any candidate, a boost among black and minority voters. Now, Jackson is a shell of himself and mired in controversies of his own making. For example, after counseling Bill Clinton about his affair with Monica Lewinsky, it was discovered that Jackson had a child out of wedlock and had been paying the mother for many years out of Rainbow/PUSH Coalition funds.
Another example, Rainbow/Push received a Federal grant for $800,000 for a reading program in Chicago. Less than $50,000 was spent of any programs. Where's the rest? The Rev. Jess Jackson refuses to say or allow Federal auditors to look at the books. I also thought that when you receive a Federal grant it was required to participate in an audit of the project. I guess Jesse Jackson is exempt from Federal law.
These are only a couple of examples of Jesse Jackson's fleecing of his supporters. His leadership in the community has diminished and his alignment with the Kerry campaign will hurt Kerry, but will probably help Jackson.
Jesse Jackson joins Kerry campaign=The Hill.com=
Parlez-vous Political Free Fall? by Ann Coulter
This week's coumn by Ann Coulter looks at polls and debates.
It is an interesting read.
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Parlez-vous Political Free Fall? by Ann Coulter
It is an interesting read.
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Parlez-vous Political Free Fall? by Ann Coulter
Tidbits - 9/30/04
Tonight is the night.
The first Presidential Debate is scheduled for this evening at 9PM (ET) from Miami FL. There are several questions that will be answered during the telecast of the event.
Who will win?
My guess is that Bush will win. His easy going style and ability to say what he means will go a long way to winning the debate. Kerry, on the other hand, will make his answers too long, make his answers too complex, and demonstrate that he does not really understand the issue. Kerry may adopt the style he uses on the Senate floor. This will not help him.
Will the networks abide by the rules?
If yesterday's announcement has any credence, the networks will not follow the rules and show the President in the worse possible light. What are the ramifications for the networks? None.
Will the moderator follow the rules?
Unlikely. Jim Lehrer from PBS' Newshour is not known for his fairness toward Republicans or the President. In the 2000 debate, Lehrer question Bush harder than Gore. He also made the questions so long and complicated that it seemed he were one of the candidates. Yes, it will be an elite liberal media reporter crafting questions designed to trap the President.
Should you watch?
Yes, although there will be a liberal bias, it is important to hear what is being said by the candidates.
Kerry is planning an after debate rally. I hope this isn't the same debacle that Kerry held in Ohio after the Republican Convention.
+Two media watchdog groups are unimpressed with the moderators for the debates.
The left-leaning Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting says that the moderators are lightweights incapable of asking the hard questions. I think this criticism could be used all the time with the liberal press.
The Center for Media Research, a great source for this blog, says that all four moderators will demonstrate a liberal bias. Well, all four of the moderators are known for their liberal bias. So, this is not a surprise.
Media Watchdogs Unimpressed With Debate Moderators -- 09/30/2004
+Polls, polls and more polls.
Recent polls in New Jersey are beginning to show Bush inching closer and closer to Kerry. Will NJ become a red state this year.
Polls put N.J. back in play for GOP - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - September 30, 2004
Polls in USA Today show Kerry a little closer in Ohio and Pennsylvania, but Kerry is falling far behind in Florida.
USATODAY.com
More later.
The first Presidential Debate is scheduled for this evening at 9PM (ET) from Miami FL. There are several questions that will be answered during the telecast of the event.
Who will win?
My guess is that Bush will win. His easy going style and ability to say what he means will go a long way to winning the debate. Kerry, on the other hand, will make his answers too long, make his answers too complex, and demonstrate that he does not really understand the issue. Kerry may adopt the style he uses on the Senate floor. This will not help him.
Will the networks abide by the rules?
If yesterday's announcement has any credence, the networks will not follow the rules and show the President in the worse possible light. What are the ramifications for the networks? None.
Will the moderator follow the rules?
Unlikely. Jim Lehrer from PBS' Newshour is not known for his fairness toward Republicans or the President. In the 2000 debate, Lehrer question Bush harder than Gore. He also made the questions so long and complicated that it seemed he were one of the candidates. Yes, it will be an elite liberal media reporter crafting questions designed to trap the President.
Should you watch?
Yes, although there will be a liberal bias, it is important to hear what is being said by the candidates.
Kerry is planning an after debate rally. I hope this isn't the same debacle that Kerry held in Ohio after the Republican Convention.
+Two media watchdog groups are unimpressed with the moderators for the debates.
The left-leaning Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting says that the moderators are lightweights incapable of asking the hard questions. I think this criticism could be used all the time with the liberal press.
The Center for Media Research, a great source for this blog, says that all four moderators will demonstrate a liberal bias. Well, all four of the moderators are known for their liberal bias. So, this is not a surprise.
Media Watchdogs Unimpressed With Debate Moderators -- 09/30/2004
+Polls, polls and more polls.
Recent polls in New Jersey are beginning to show Bush inching closer and closer to Kerry. Will NJ become a red state this year.
Polls put N.J. back in play for GOP - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - September 30, 2004
Polls in USA Today show Kerry a little closer in Ohio and Pennsylvania, but Kerry is falling far behind in Florida.
USATODAY.com
More later.
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Kerry misspeaks about 'inarticulate moment'
Can John Kerry say anything straight? I am beginning to wonder.
Senator Kerry is famous for his statement, "I voted for the $87 Billion, before I voted against it."
On Good Morning America, Senator Kerry said that his "inarticulate moment" was due to the lateness of the evening.
Well, Senator, according to multiple sources, including the campaign, that statement was made at noon.
WorldNetDaily: Kerry misspeaks about 'inarticulate moment'
Senator Kerry is famous for his statement, "I voted for the $87 Billion, before I voted against it."
On Good Morning America, Senator Kerry said that his "inarticulate moment" was due to the lateness of the evening.
Well, Senator, according to multiple sources, including the campaign, that statement was made at noon.
WorldNetDaily: Kerry misspeaks about 'inarticulate moment'
Another CBS Problem?
Did CBS do it again? It appears that CBS News used rumor, uncredited sources, and Michael Moore techniques in it story about the possibility of a revived draft.
The possibility of a revived draft has been the stuff of rumors on the Internet for months, probably, years. CBS nor the democrats have ever picked it up as a campaign issue. That is, until this week.
Although Dan Rather called the internet "filled with rumors," CBS reporter Richard Schlesinger decided that it was a viable story.
Even Rather's best friend, John Kerry, said when asked, "Is it possible? I don't know."
Just like Rathergate, this story has used rumor and other techniques to scare voters.
There is, however, one hint of truth about the issue. There are one or two bills floating around Congress that would reinstate the draft. It is unlikely that Congress would have the "guts" to pass them and it is unlikely that President Bush would sign them. Would a President Kerry sign them, probably.
RatherBiased.com
The possibility of a revived draft has been the stuff of rumors on the Internet for months, probably, years. CBS nor the democrats have ever picked it up as a campaign issue. That is, until this week.
Although Dan Rather called the internet "filled with rumors," CBS reporter Richard Schlesinger decided that it was a viable story.
Even Rather's best friend, John Kerry, said when asked, "Is it possible? I don't know."
Just like Rathergate, this story has used rumor and other techniques to scare voters.
There is, however, one hint of truth about the issue. There are one or two bills floating around Congress that would reinstate the draft. It is unlikely that Congress would have the "guts" to pass them and it is unlikely that President Bush would sign them. Would a President Kerry sign them, probably.
RatherBiased.com
Tidbits - 9/29/04
A reporter for MSNBC just demonstrated liberal bias and a lack of historical accuracy.
He was reporting on the new Bush ad. In the ad it says that after the first World Trade Center bombing that Senator Kerry voted against weapon systems and intelligence funding. All true, check his record.
The reporter said that Senator Kerry voted for some military funding and that Dick Cheney, Bush 41's Secretary of Defense, was in favor of eliminating the same weapon systems.
ATTENTION MSNBC, the first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993 during President Clinton's watch. Dick Cheney was no longer in office and had nothing to do with Senator Kerry's votes.
Sorry MSNBC, you need to understand who was President when and how Senator Kerry has voted against most military and intelligence finding during his career in the Senate.
+The liberal media wants its own way during the debates.
All the major networks, including Fox, say they will not abide by the rules for camera shots during the debates.
I guess they want to edit them to make the President look as bad as possible.
In that case, debates over.
CNN.com - Networks balk at Bush-Kerry debate agreement - Sep 29, 2004
+A source close to the case announced today that Martha Stewart will be serving her time in a minimum security prison in West Virginia.
Stewart had requested a prison in Danbury, CT or Coleman, Fl. As reported here, both of these prison are at capacity and not available to house Stewart.
Stewart must report to the prison on October 8.
My Way News
More later
He was reporting on the new Bush ad. In the ad it says that after the first World Trade Center bombing that Senator Kerry voted against weapon systems and intelligence funding. All true, check his record.
The reporter said that Senator Kerry voted for some military funding and that Dick Cheney, Bush 41's Secretary of Defense, was in favor of eliminating the same weapon systems.
ATTENTION MSNBC, the first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993 during President Clinton's watch. Dick Cheney was no longer in office and had nothing to do with Senator Kerry's votes.
Sorry MSNBC, you need to understand who was President when and how Senator Kerry has voted against most military and intelligence finding during his career in the Senate.
+The liberal media wants its own way during the debates.
All the major networks, including Fox, say they will not abide by the rules for camera shots during the debates.
I guess they want to edit them to make the President look as bad as possible.
In that case, debates over.
CNN.com - Networks balk at Bush-Kerry debate agreement - Sep 29, 2004
+A source close to the case announced today that Martha Stewart will be serving her time in a minimum security prison in West Virginia.
Stewart had requested a prison in Danbury, CT or Coleman, Fl. As reported here, both of these prison are at capacity and not available to house Stewart.
Stewart must report to the prison on October 8.
My Way News
More later
Debate Rules
Here are just a few of the rules for the Presidential Debates.
In total there are 32 pages of rules, but these are some of the more interesting.
The candidates are not allowed to ask each other questions, but may raise rhetorical questions.
The candidates get to choose how they will be addressed (such as "President" Bush or "Senator" Kerry.)
The moderator is supposed to manage the debate so that each candidate answers 16 questions.
On the October 8 debate, citizens will be allowed to ask questions. The moderator will review the questions, but nobody else is allowed to see the questions. If the questioner tries to pull a bait and switch, and ask a question that is different from the one the person submitted, the moderator is supposed to cut them off. And shut off the microphone. The audience members for the "Town Meeting" will be made up of equal numbers of so-called "soft Bush" supporters and "soft Kerry" supporters. The Gallup organization will find the people who will ask questions.
The campaigns are forbidden from contacting the citizens who will be asking questions for the October 8 forum.
The campaigns are forbidden from using video or audio clips from the debate in campaign ads, but I don't see anything that will keep the "527" groups from using the clips.
The candidates will be standing behind 50-inch "podiums" for the debates, except for the Town Meeting, when they will sit on stools. The agreement says they will stand behind a "podium." Podiums are elevated platforms or low walls.
Candidates are expressly forbidden from using risers that will make them look taller.
The TV camera shots will be locked down.
There will be no "cutaway" shots of the other candidate while one candidate is talking. So you won't see "reaction" shots of the other guy rolling his eyes or whatever.
Each candidate will have his own make-up person.
(Let's hope Kerry find someone who will not make him look orange.)
Each candidate may have Secret Service folks and one staff member in the stage wings.
The President and Veep both get to have a physician and military advisor in the wings.
Each campaign gets 30 press passes to the Media Center during the debate, which allows for appropriate amounts of "spin control." There is no limit on the number of "Spinsters" the campaigns may send to the media center after the debate.
In total there are 32 pages of rules, but these are some of the more interesting.
The candidates are not allowed to ask each other questions, but may raise rhetorical questions.
The candidates get to choose how they will be addressed (such as "President" Bush or "Senator" Kerry.)
The moderator is supposed to manage the debate so that each candidate answers 16 questions.
On the October 8 debate, citizens will be allowed to ask questions. The moderator will review the questions, but nobody else is allowed to see the questions. If the questioner tries to pull a bait and switch, and ask a question that is different from the one the person submitted, the moderator is supposed to cut them off. And shut off the microphone. The audience members for the "Town Meeting" will be made up of equal numbers of so-called "soft Bush" supporters and "soft Kerry" supporters. The Gallup organization will find the people who will ask questions.
The campaigns are forbidden from contacting the citizens who will be asking questions for the October 8 forum.
The campaigns are forbidden from using video or audio clips from the debate in campaign ads, but I don't see anything that will keep the "527" groups from using the clips.
The candidates will be standing behind 50-inch "podiums" for the debates, except for the Town Meeting, when they will sit on stools. The agreement says they will stand behind a "podium." Podiums are elevated platforms or low walls.
Candidates are expressly forbidden from using risers that will make them look taller.
The TV camera shots will be locked down.
There will be no "cutaway" shots of the other candidate while one candidate is talking. So you won't see "reaction" shots of the other guy rolling his eyes or whatever.
Each candidate will have his own make-up person.
(Let's hope Kerry find someone who will not make him look orange.)
Each candidate may have Secret Service folks and one staff member in the stage wings.
The President and Veep both get to have a physician and military advisor in the wings.
Each campaign gets 30 press passes to the Media Center during the debate, which allows for appropriate amounts of "spin control." There is no limit on the number of "Spinsters" the campaigns may send to the media center after the debate.
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
60 Minutes Producer Liberal Democrat
The executive producer of 60 Minutes Wednesday, Josh Howard is a confirmed liberal democrat operative.
Howard once worked for liberal democrats Charles Schumer and New York Congressman Steven Solarz. Records also indicate that Howard contributed money to the Solarz campaign AFTER being hired at CBS News.
So it now appears that, at least, two CBS producers and Dan Rather need to be relived of their jobs.
More below from the Media Research Center.
The top producer for the CBS show which used forged
documents to advance a liberal Democratic cause, once toiled for
left-wing Democrats -- elected ones, that is. Josh Howard, the
Executive Producer of the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes, served on the staff of current Senator Charles Schumer when Schumer was in the state legislature, moved on to the staff of former New York Congressman Steven Solarz and later, while on the CBS News payroll, made large contributions to the Solarz campaign, Bob Novak revealed in his weekend compilation column.
Dan Rather objected to CBS hiring Diane Sawyer, who had worked for Richard Nixon, so did Rather fight Howard's hiring? And it isn't as if CBS is forgiving of long-past political activity. Just
in May the CBS Evening News tried to discredit John O'Neill of
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth by bringing up how in 1971 he was
"handpicked by the Nixon administration to discredit Kerry."
The MRC's Tim Graham alerted me to the first item in Novak's
weekend column which regularly features three or four short items,
a column not carried by the Washington Post, but which is run on
Sundays by many papers around the country.
Novak reported: "The executive producer of CBS's 60 Minutes
midweek broadcast, who partially blamed the Bush White House for
bogus documents used by Dan Rather, is a former staffer for New
York Democrats who was still making political contributions while
on the network's payroll.
"Josh Howard served on the staff of Rep. Stephen Solarz and
worked for Sen. Charles Schumer when Schumer was a state
assemblyman, a background confirmed by CBS. Federal election
reporting records show that Howard, identifying himself as a CBS
employee, contributed $1,000 in each of Solarz's last two
campaigns for Congress in 1990 and 1992.
"When CBS first conceded possible defects in the documents
about George W. Bush's military service, Howard said: 'If the
White House had just raised an eyebrow -- they didn't have to say they were forgeries -- but if there was any hint that there was a question, that would have sent us back.'"
For the rest of that Novak column, check the TownHall.com
posting of it: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20040925.shtml
The 1990/1992 donations to Solarz came when Howard was working as Mike Wallace's producer, according to the career timeline outlined on Howard's posted bio which noted that Howard joined CBS in 1981, at WCBS-TV in New York City, thus placing his
Schumer/Solarz work in the late 1970s. Howard has spent the last
decade and a half with 60 Minutes, but he also put in a stint in
the late 1980s as a producer for the CBS Evening News.
With the merger of 60 Minutes and 60 Minutes II in June,
Howard became Executive Producer of the Wednesday edition just in time to oversee the hit job on Bush using the forged memos.
For his bio on CBSNews.com, with a picture of him:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/04/60II/main621207.shtml
So, did Dan Rather object to Howard becoming a CBS Evening
News producer? After all, as Diane Sawyer confided on Larry King's
CNN show last Wednesday, when CBS hired her Rather told her: "'I
didn't think you should be hired. I fought your being hired and I
wanted you to hear it from me before you heard it from anybody
else,' because I had worked in the Nixon administration." See:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040924.asp#4
And impugning someone's present day motives based on a
political tie in the 1970s is certainly not out of bounds at CBS
News. Back on the May 4 CBS Evening News, in trying to discredit
the claims made at a Swift Boat Veterans for Truth press
conference, CBS reporter Byron Pitts asserted: "But if you think
this is just a concerned group of veterans, think again." Pitts
pointed out that John O'Neill "debated Kerry about Vietnam on the
Dick Cavett Show in 1971. Back then he was handpicked by the Nixon administration to discredit Kerry." See:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040505.asp#1
Just as Josh Howard was handpicked by Steven Solarz to
discredit House Republicans a few years later.
To use the reasoning forwarded by Pitts, "if you think CBS
News is just a concerned group of impartial journalists, think
again."
Howard once worked for liberal democrats Charles Schumer and New York Congressman Steven Solarz. Records also indicate that Howard contributed money to the Solarz campaign AFTER being hired at CBS News.
So it now appears that, at least, two CBS producers and Dan Rather need to be relived of their jobs.
More below from the Media Research Center.
The top producer for the CBS show which used forged
documents to advance a liberal Democratic cause, once toiled for
left-wing Democrats -- elected ones, that is. Josh Howard, the
Executive Producer of the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes, served on the staff of current Senator Charles Schumer when Schumer was in the state legislature, moved on to the staff of former New York Congressman Steven Solarz and later, while on the CBS News payroll, made large contributions to the Solarz campaign, Bob Novak revealed in his weekend compilation column.
Dan Rather objected to CBS hiring Diane Sawyer, who had worked for Richard Nixon, so did Rather fight Howard's hiring? And it isn't as if CBS is forgiving of long-past political activity. Just
in May the CBS Evening News tried to discredit John O'Neill of
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth by bringing up how in 1971 he was
"handpicked by the Nixon administration to discredit Kerry."
The MRC's Tim Graham alerted me to the first item in Novak's
weekend column which regularly features three or four short items,
a column not carried by the Washington Post, but which is run on
Sundays by many papers around the country.
Novak reported: "The executive producer of CBS's 60 Minutes
midweek broadcast, who partially blamed the Bush White House for
bogus documents used by Dan Rather, is a former staffer for New
York Democrats who was still making political contributions while
on the network's payroll.
"Josh Howard served on the staff of Rep. Stephen Solarz and
worked for Sen. Charles Schumer when Schumer was a state
assemblyman, a background confirmed by CBS. Federal election
reporting records show that Howard, identifying himself as a CBS
employee, contributed $1,000 in each of Solarz's last two
campaigns for Congress in 1990 and 1992.
"When CBS first conceded possible defects in the documents
about George W. Bush's military service, Howard said: 'If the
White House had just raised an eyebrow -- they didn't have to say they were forgeries -- but if there was any hint that there was a question, that would have sent us back.'"
For the rest of that Novak column, check the TownHall.com
posting of it: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20040925.shtml
The 1990/1992 donations to Solarz came when Howard was working as Mike Wallace's producer, according to the career timeline outlined on Howard's posted bio which noted that Howard joined CBS in 1981, at WCBS-TV in New York City, thus placing his
Schumer/Solarz work in the late 1970s. Howard has spent the last
decade and a half with 60 Minutes, but he also put in a stint in
the late 1980s as a producer for the CBS Evening News.
With the merger of 60 Minutes and 60 Minutes II in June,
Howard became Executive Producer of the Wednesday edition just in time to oversee the hit job on Bush using the forged memos.
For his bio on CBSNews.com, with a picture of him:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/04/60II/main621207.shtml
So, did Dan Rather object to Howard becoming a CBS Evening
News producer? After all, as Diane Sawyer confided on Larry King's
CNN show last Wednesday, when CBS hired her Rather told her: "'I
didn't think you should be hired. I fought your being hired and I
wanted you to hear it from me before you heard it from anybody
else,' because I had worked in the Nixon administration." See:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040924.asp#4
And impugning someone's present day motives based on a
political tie in the 1970s is certainly not out of bounds at CBS
News. Back on the May 4 CBS Evening News, in trying to discredit
the claims made at a Swift Boat Veterans for Truth press
conference, CBS reporter Byron Pitts asserted: "But if you think
this is just a concerned group of veterans, think again." Pitts
pointed out that John O'Neill "debated Kerry about Vietnam on the
Dick Cavett Show in 1971. Back then he was handpicked by the Nixon administration to discredit Kerry." See:
http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040505.asp#1
Just as Josh Howard was handpicked by Steven Solarz to
discredit House Republicans a few years later.
To use the reasoning forwarded by Pitts, "if you think CBS
News is just a concerned group of impartial journalists, think
again."
Rather Out as Spokesman
CBS News anchor, Dan Rather, has been removed from the air on, at least, two stations.
For years, Rather did headlines and IDs for some Infinity owned stations and affiliates across the country. Now, after Rathegate, many stations are removing him from the air.
Here's a brief story from the Chicago Sun-Times.
"It didn't take long for Dan Rather's radio brethren in Chicago to break bad on him. Within hours of CBS News' backpedaling on its '60 Minutes' report about President Bush's National Guard service, the Infinity Broadcasting all-news station here dropped all station identifications featuring the star anchorman's voice.
Until last week, WBBM-AM (780) had been airing one of four different station IDs and promos delivered by Rather at the top of the hour and during Bears pre-game and post-game broadcasts.
In related actions, KPRC-AM in Houston pulled Rather's daily radio newscast, and WNIS-AM in Norfolk, Va., withdrew its CBS affiliation.
But unlike 'Newsradio 780,' which is owned by the same Viacom Inc. parent as CBS, the other stations are only affiliates of the network.
Rather apologized for using documents in his Sept. 8 '60 Minutes' piece that were not authenticated."
For years, Rather did headlines and IDs for some Infinity owned stations and affiliates across the country. Now, after Rathegate, many stations are removing him from the air.
Here's a brief story from the Chicago Sun-Times.
"It didn't take long for Dan Rather's radio brethren in Chicago to break bad on him. Within hours of CBS News' backpedaling on its '60 Minutes' report about President Bush's National Guard service, the Infinity Broadcasting all-news station here dropped all station identifications featuring the star anchorman's voice.
Until last week, WBBM-AM (780) had been airing one of four different station IDs and promos delivered by Rather at the top of the hour and during Bears pre-game and post-game broadcasts.
In related actions, KPRC-AM in Houston pulled Rather's daily radio newscast, and WNIS-AM in Norfolk, Va., withdrew its CBS affiliation.
But unlike 'Newsradio 780,' which is owned by the same Viacom Inc. parent as CBS, the other stations are only affiliates of the network.
Rather apologized for using documents in his Sept. 8 '60 Minutes' piece that were not authenticated."
For Public Stations, Satellite Programming May Signal Trouble Ahead
An article in the Washington Post says Public Radio is in danger of severe competition from Satellite Radio.
With the start of former NPR Morning Edition host, Bob Edwards, one hour program on XM Satellite, many NPR program distributorsd may be looking to satellite radio for distribution of programming. Why? Because satellite radio can find additional money to pruchase program. It couild be a healthy revenue stream. This, accroding to the Psot, will signal danger to NPR stations.
I'm not sure the Post has thought this through. While some NPR and other distributors may find a home for some programming on the satellite providers, listeners will have to "buy" into satellite radio. There is a fairly high initial investment of about $200, depedning on where you will listen, and a $10 per month fee. People who are inclined to use every new technology will find an advantage to satellite radio. It's interesting, it's fun and there are 100+ channels.
Here is what the Post forgot, radio is still a local medium. While there are some NPR stations that simply channel NPR programming with little or no local identity, the vast majority of public radio stations have a string local identity and programming. One of the best examples of how strong a local station can be is WBEZ, Chicago Public Radio.
If some NPR programming were not available to local stations, that would save the stations money and make them more viable and valuable to the communities they serve.
Is satellite radio a danger to local public radio stations? No, only short-sighted managers and programmers are a danger to local public radio.
For Public Stations, Satellite Programming May Signal Trouble Ahead (washingtonpost.com)
With the start of former NPR Morning Edition host, Bob Edwards, one hour program on XM Satellite, many NPR program distributorsd may be looking to satellite radio for distribution of programming. Why? Because satellite radio can find additional money to pruchase program. It couild be a healthy revenue stream. This, accroding to the Psot, will signal danger to NPR stations.
I'm not sure the Post has thought this through. While some NPR and other distributors may find a home for some programming on the satellite providers, listeners will have to "buy" into satellite radio. There is a fairly high initial investment of about $200, depedning on where you will listen, and a $10 per month fee. People who are inclined to use every new technology will find an advantage to satellite radio. It's interesting, it's fun and there are 100+ channels.
Here is what the Post forgot, radio is still a local medium. While there are some NPR stations that simply channel NPR programming with little or no local identity, the vast majority of public radio stations have a string local identity and programming. One of the best examples of how strong a local station can be is WBEZ, Chicago Public Radio.
If some NPR programming were not available to local stations, that would save the stations money and make them more viable and valuable to the communities they serve.
Is satellite radio a danger to local public radio stations? No, only short-sighted managers and programmers are a danger to local public radio.
For Public Stations, Satellite Programming May Signal Trouble Ahead (washingtonpost.com)
Items From the Kerry Spot on National Review Online
USA TODAY POLL INTERNALS:
All in all, the Bush campaign must be pretty pleased with the internals of the USA Today-CNN-Gallup poll.
Bush's job approval rating: 54 percent
Do you think the policies being proposed by each of the following presidential candidates would move the country in the right direction or in the wrong direction?
John Kerry, likely voters:
Right direction: 44 percent; Wrong direction: 49 percent
John Kerry, registered voters:
Right direction: 42 percent; Wrong direction: 49 percent
George W. Bush, likely voters:
Right direction: 54 percent; Wrong direction: 44 percent
George W. Bush, registered voters:
Right direction: 56 percent; Wrong direction: 40 percent
Bush Certain Voters - 47 percent
Bush voters may change mind - 5 percent
Kerry Certain Voters - 37 percent
Kerry voters may change mind - 7 percent
The one bit of bad news - more for Kerry Spot readers than for the Bush campaign - is that the Pajamahadeen may not be as influential as thought. When asked whether CBS News reported its story "mostly as an honest mistake due to carelessness in their fact checking and reporting" or mostly "due to a desire to make George W. Bush look bad" 56 percent said "honest mistake," 38 percent said "to make Bush look bad."
Also, 26 percent say Dan Rather should be fired, 64 percent say he should not.
ABC POLL HAS BUSH UP, 51-45
Boy, the guys at ABC like to hide the basic who's winning numbers in the middle of the story.
Fifty-one percent of likely voters in this poll support Bush, 45 percent Kerry and one percent Ralph Nader, much like the 52-43-2 percent race on Sept. 8. It's nearly identical among all registered voters.
Bush's job approval is at 52 percent, which ABC calls "tepid."
Of course, ABC would call 52% "tepid," it is almost as liberal as CBS who did not report any poll numbers.
NO, LOCKHART'S NOT A GOOD CLOSER EITHER
Mickey Kaus makes an observation that seems obvious, yet no one has mentioned it yet:
Joe Lockhart was supposed to be the Clintonite pro who came in and saved the Kerry campaign. So far he's a) embroiled the campaign in the Dan Rather/Bill Burkett CBS memo fiasco and b) ham-handedly called Iraqi interim P.M. Allawi a "puppet." But I hear he's a good closer! ...
P.S.: I've been all for a Kerry's recent assault on Bush's policy on Iraq and the larger war on terror. That's what the election is about.** But is there any evidence that Kerry's Iraq push is working to change votes? Maybe the ABC/WaPo poll tonight will have some. ...
Update: Nope. ...
(** I don't like the way Kerry's gone about it, reacting in slightly hysterical doom-and-gloomish fashion to whatever bad news or minor Bush gaffe is out there each day. But I only authorized Kerry's Iraq attacks. I don't approve of of the way he's used that authority.)
While Kerry's attacks on Bush have been a little sharper, it's kind of hard to tell what bringing on all the Clintonites has done for his campaign. And didn't Lockhart build his reputation as Clinton's second-term press secretary? When Clinton was an incumbent who wasn't going to face the voters again?
In fact, wasn't his job mostly to attack GOP congressional leaders morning, noon, and night? Yes, yes it was.
All in all, the Bush campaign must be pretty pleased with the internals of the USA Today-CNN-Gallup poll.
Bush's job approval rating: 54 percent
Do you think the policies being proposed by each of the following presidential candidates would move the country in the right direction or in the wrong direction?
John Kerry, likely voters:
Right direction: 44 percent; Wrong direction: 49 percent
John Kerry, registered voters:
Right direction: 42 percent; Wrong direction: 49 percent
George W. Bush, likely voters:
Right direction: 54 percent; Wrong direction: 44 percent
George W. Bush, registered voters:
Right direction: 56 percent; Wrong direction: 40 percent
Bush Certain Voters - 47 percent
Bush voters may change mind - 5 percent
Kerry Certain Voters - 37 percent
Kerry voters may change mind - 7 percent
The one bit of bad news - more for Kerry Spot readers than for the Bush campaign - is that the Pajamahadeen may not be as influential as thought. When asked whether CBS News reported its story "mostly as an honest mistake due to carelessness in their fact checking and reporting" or mostly "due to a desire to make George W. Bush look bad" 56 percent said "honest mistake," 38 percent said "to make Bush look bad."
Also, 26 percent say Dan Rather should be fired, 64 percent say he should not.
ABC POLL HAS BUSH UP, 51-45
Boy, the guys at ABC like to hide the basic who's winning numbers in the middle of the story.
Fifty-one percent of likely voters in this poll support Bush, 45 percent Kerry and one percent Ralph Nader, much like the 52-43-2 percent race on Sept. 8. It's nearly identical among all registered voters.
Bush's job approval is at 52 percent, which ABC calls "tepid."
Of course, ABC would call 52% "tepid," it is almost as liberal as CBS who did not report any poll numbers.
NO, LOCKHART'S NOT A GOOD CLOSER EITHER
Mickey Kaus makes an observation that seems obvious, yet no one has mentioned it yet:
Joe Lockhart was supposed to be the Clintonite pro who came in and saved the Kerry campaign. So far he's a) embroiled the campaign in the Dan Rather/Bill Burkett CBS memo fiasco and b) ham-handedly called Iraqi interim P.M. Allawi a "puppet." But I hear he's a good closer! ...
P.S.: I've been all for a Kerry's recent assault on Bush's policy on Iraq and the larger war on terror. That's what the election is about.** But is there any evidence that Kerry's Iraq push is working to change votes? Maybe the ABC/WaPo poll tonight will have some. ...
Update: Nope. ...
(** I don't like the way Kerry's gone about it, reacting in slightly hysterical doom-and-gloomish fashion to whatever bad news or minor Bush gaffe is out there each day. But I only authorized Kerry's Iraq attacks. I don't approve of of the way he's used that authority.)
While Kerry's attacks on Bush have been a little sharper, it's kind of hard to tell what bringing on all the Clintonites has done for his campaign. And didn't Lockhart build his reputation as Clinton's second-term press secretary? When Clinton was an incumbent who wasn't going to face the voters again?
In fact, wasn't his job mostly to attack GOP congressional leaders morning, noon, and night? Yes, yes it was.
Tidbits - 9/28/04
Jay Leno told an interesting joke during his monologue Monday night.
He was talking about the Forbes list of billionaires.
"The richest women in the US is Alice Watson with 18 Billion dollars. Or as Senator Kerry calls her, the one that got away."
Good one, Jay.
No for some more interesting items.
+An ad campaign starting today calls for the removal of Dan Rather as CBS' evening news anchor.
The ads to be seen in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania are sponsored by Republican businessman Doug Forrester. Forrester is thought to be one of several candidates for governor of New Jersey.
The ads say that it was not "sloppy journalism. It was political bias." This is a charge that Rather has heard for years and his record supports it.
Newsday.com - Ads say Rather Must Go
+Several polls were released yesterday and some new ones today shoe President Bush with a 6-8 point lead among registered and likely voters.
This is good news going into the debates. Bush is a good debater and will probably win. Kerry needs to clarify and simplify his language to engage voters.
More later.
He was talking about the Forbes list of billionaires.
"The richest women in the US is Alice Watson with 18 Billion dollars. Or as Senator Kerry calls her, the one that got away."
Good one, Jay.
No for some more interesting items.
+An ad campaign starting today calls for the removal of Dan Rather as CBS' evening news anchor.
The ads to be seen in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania are sponsored by Republican businessman Doug Forrester. Forrester is thought to be one of several candidates for governor of New Jersey.
The ads say that it was not "sloppy journalism. It was political bias." This is a charge that Rather has heard for years and his record supports it.
Newsday.com - Ads say Rather Must Go
+Several polls were released yesterday and some new ones today shoe President Bush with a 6-8 point lead among registered and likely voters.
This is good news going into the debates. Bush is a good debater and will probably win. Kerry needs to clarify and simplify his language to engage voters.
More later.
Monday, September 27, 2004
Congress Probing U.N. Oil-For Food Program
Congress is going to investigate the corrupt UN Oil-For-Food Program.
While there should be an investigation to show which of our allies benefited from the corruption, what will be the outcome of the investigation?
Will Congress issue a resolution saying that the program and the UN are corrupt? The UN will say, "So what."
If the program is as corrupt as many believe it is, the US should withhold any funds or dues to the UN. I would even suggest that the US pull out of the UN and request that UN headquarters move out of the US.
Will that happen? No, Congress will just waste taxpayer dollars on another fruitless investigation on a discredited, corrupt, and unimportant organization.
Yahoo! News - Congress Probing U.N. Oil-For Food Program
While there should be an investigation to show which of our allies benefited from the corruption, what will be the outcome of the investigation?
Will Congress issue a resolution saying that the program and the UN are corrupt? The UN will say, "So what."
If the program is as corrupt as many believe it is, the US should withhold any funds or dues to the UN. I would even suggest that the US pull out of the UN and request that UN headquarters move out of the US.
Will that happen? No, Congress will just waste taxpayer dollars on another fruitless investigation on a discredited, corrupt, and unimportant organization.
Yahoo! News - Congress Probing U.N. Oil-For Food Program
No French or German turn on Iraq
One of the cornerstone of the Kerry campaign is increased international cooperation in Iraq. Kerry claims that if he were President, he would be able to convince European allies to provide increased military assistance.
This appears to be untrue. In an article in the Financial Times, German and French officials say that no matter who is President after November 2, there will be no increase in military assistance in Iraq.
FT.com / Home UK - No French or German turn on Iraq
This appears to be untrue. In an article in the Financial Times, German and French officials say that no matter who is President after November 2, there will be no increase in military assistance in Iraq.
FT.com / Home UK - No French or German turn on Iraq
Debates Are Prime Time for Pundits
The first of three Presidential Debates will happen on Thursday in Miami FL.
It will be a time to test challenger John Kerry on his stances on foreign policy issues, as well as, homeland security.
It will also be a test for President Bush. Bush's easy going style, as demonstrated in 2000, needs to avoid stepping into any Democrat traps that make him look out of touch.
While the debate is not until Thursday, pundits are already telling the candidates how to debate.
My prediction is Bush will win the debate and Kerry will change position during the debate.
Debates Are Prime Time for Pundits -- 09/27/2004
It will be a time to test challenger John Kerry on his stances on foreign policy issues, as well as, homeland security.
It will also be a test for President Bush. Bush's easy going style, as demonstrated in 2000, needs to avoid stepping into any Democrat traps that make him look out of touch.
While the debate is not until Thursday, pundits are already telling the candidates how to debate.
My prediction is Bush will win the debate and Kerry will change position during the debate.
Debates Are Prime Time for Pundits -- 09/27/2004
Items From the Kerry Spot on National Review Online
FORGET WINDSURFING - THIS IS A FLIP-FLOP AD
The Bush team has stopped painting Kerry's flip-flops as a funny point of mockery, and are back to suggesting it would make Kerry an unreliable commander-in-chief.
Transcript:
President Bush: I'm George W. Bush and I approve this message.
John Kerry:
"It was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision I supported him."
"I don't believe the President took us to war as he should have."
"The winning of the war was brilliant."
"It's the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time."
"I have always said we may yet even find weapons of mass destruction."
"I actually did vote for the 87 billion dollars before I voted against it."
Graphic:
How can John Kerry protect us…
…when he doesn't even know where he stands?
It seems like a much shorter version of the eleven minute tape that the RNC released during the Democratic convention.
CLIP AND SAVE THIS ITEM FOR WHEN KERRY MENTIONS VIETNAM
A point in a Newsweek article, noticed by Instapundit:
The standard rap against Bush is that he was ducking combat by joining the Guard. Actually, the Texas Air Guard had a program called Palace Alert that allowed pilots to volunteer for flight time in Vietnam. Three of Bush's fellow pilots—Udell, Woodfin and Fred Bradley—recalled to NEWSWEEK that Bush inquired with the base commander about signing up for Palace Alert. He was told no; he had too few flying hours at the time and his plane, the F-102, was by then deemed obsolete for air combat.
Compare that with this Daily Telegraph article about Kerry writing "to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s."
The contrast between the two men is not quite as clear as the Democratic strategists who planned their convention might hope, is it?
There is even more to this.
The Kerry campaign loves to say that Kerry "volunteered" for combat. Not really true.
The record shows that Kerry jpoined the Naval Reserve unit in Massachusetts because it was "unlikely" to be called up for duty in Vietnam. When called up for duty, Kerry did "volunteer" for Swift boat duty, but only bacause the Swift boats were in non-combat operations. It was only after Kerry joined the Swift boats that they were used in combat areas.
The Bush team has stopped painting Kerry's flip-flops as a funny point of mockery, and are back to suggesting it would make Kerry an unreliable commander-in-chief.
Transcript:
President Bush: I'm George W. Bush and I approve this message.
John Kerry:
"It was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision I supported him."
"I don't believe the President took us to war as he should have."
"The winning of the war was brilliant."
"It's the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time."
"I have always said we may yet even find weapons of mass destruction."
"I actually did vote for the 87 billion dollars before I voted against it."
Graphic:
How can John Kerry protect us…
…when he doesn't even know where he stands?
It seems like a much shorter version of the eleven minute tape that the RNC released during the Democratic convention.
CLIP AND SAVE THIS ITEM FOR WHEN KERRY MENTIONS VIETNAM
A point in a Newsweek article, noticed by Instapundit:
The standard rap against Bush is that he was ducking combat by joining the Guard. Actually, the Texas Air Guard had a program called Palace Alert that allowed pilots to volunteer for flight time in Vietnam. Three of Bush's fellow pilots—Udell, Woodfin and Fred Bradley—recalled to NEWSWEEK that Bush inquired with the base commander about signing up for Palace Alert. He was told no; he had too few flying hours at the time and his plane, the F-102, was by then deemed obsolete for air combat.
Compare that with this Daily Telegraph article about Kerry writing "to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s."
The contrast between the two men is not quite as clear as the Democratic strategists who planned their convention might hope, is it?
There is even more to this.
The Kerry campaign loves to say that Kerry "volunteered" for combat. Not really true.
The record shows that Kerry jpoined the Naval Reserve unit in Massachusetts because it was "unlikely" to be called up for duty in Vietnam. When called up for duty, Kerry did "volunteer" for Swift boat duty, but only bacause the Swift boats were in non-combat operations. It was only after Kerry joined the Swift boats that they were used in combat areas.
Weekend Thoughts
With another hurricane moving across Florida, it was a relatively slow news weekend.
Kerry made a few speeches and Teresa Heinz-Kerry yelled at a heckler.
Here are some interesting items.
+In an attempt to revive Cold War fears, Senator Red Kennedy (D-MA) says that the US is in more danger from a "nuclear 9/11."
Senator that is just not true and is a scare tactic. I guess the Senator will be re-opening his bomb shelter at the Kennedy compound.
Boston Globe Online: Print it!
+There are more rumors at CBS. Well, they may or may not be rumors. Late last week Sumner Redstone, CEO and Chairman of Viacom, CBS' parent company, said that after the investigation there will be "appropriate consequences" for those involved in the memo scandal. Redstone also announced that the continuation of the Bush Administration was the best for Viacom. Over the years, Redstone has given money to Democratic candidates including John Kerry.
Now there is an article in the New York Times hinting that there will be a transition at the anchor desk for the CBS Evening News. It is possible that the network will make a change by next spring at the end of May sweeps. This would give Rather's replacement a summer to build up name recognition.
Who will replace Dan Rather is sheer speculation. Two names appear at the top of the list, John Roberts and Scott Pelley. Neither has much name recognition nor a reputation for being an anchor. The news division could also go outside the network for a replacement.
When of if Dan Rather leaves the network is based on the results of the investigation launched by CBS. Rather has already criticized one of the members of the investigation, Republican Richard Thornburg.
The decision to keep or ask Rather to retire is further complicated by the retirement of Tom Brokaw at NBC. With a new, younger anchor at NBC, it is possible that viewers will be anchor shopping. This could work in favor of the third place CBS Evening News.
Whatever the outcome, it will be interesting to watch.
The New York Times > Business > Media & Advertising > CBS Tries to Clear Up Signals on Future of 'Evening News'
More later.
Kerry made a few speeches and Teresa Heinz-Kerry yelled at a heckler.
Here are some interesting items.
+In an attempt to revive Cold War fears, Senator Red Kennedy (D-MA) says that the US is in more danger from a "nuclear 9/11."
Senator that is just not true and is a scare tactic. I guess the Senator will be re-opening his bomb shelter at the Kennedy compound.
Boston Globe Online: Print it!
+There are more rumors at CBS. Well, they may or may not be rumors. Late last week Sumner Redstone, CEO and Chairman of Viacom, CBS' parent company, said that after the investigation there will be "appropriate consequences" for those involved in the memo scandal. Redstone also announced that the continuation of the Bush Administration was the best for Viacom. Over the years, Redstone has given money to Democratic candidates including John Kerry.
Now there is an article in the New York Times hinting that there will be a transition at the anchor desk for the CBS Evening News. It is possible that the network will make a change by next spring at the end of May sweeps. This would give Rather's replacement a summer to build up name recognition.
Who will replace Dan Rather is sheer speculation. Two names appear at the top of the list, John Roberts and Scott Pelley. Neither has much name recognition nor a reputation for being an anchor. The news division could also go outside the network for a replacement.
When of if Dan Rather leaves the network is based on the results of the investigation launched by CBS. Rather has already criticized one of the members of the investigation, Republican Richard Thornburg.
The decision to keep or ask Rather to retire is further complicated by the retirement of Tom Brokaw at NBC. With a new, younger anchor at NBC, it is possible that viewers will be anchor shopping. This could work in favor of the third place CBS Evening News.
Whatever the outcome, it will be interesting to watch.
The New York Times > Business > Media & Advertising > CBS Tries to Clear Up Signals on Future of 'Evening News'
More later.
Saturday, September 25, 2004
Dan Rather's Day of Reckoning
An excellent article from John Podhorez in the Weekly Standard.
It appears that the recent memogate (I prefer Rathergate) is the latest in a long line of journalistic and political fraud at CBS News. Some of it involving or remembered by Dan Rather.
Dan Rather's Day of Reckoning
It appears that the recent memogate (I prefer Rathergate) is the latest in a long line of journalistic and political fraud at CBS News. Some of it involving or remembered by Dan Rather.
Dan Rather's Day of Reckoning
Friday, September 24, 2004
Retractions Anyone?
It seems that everybody has been misquoted or taken out of context.
Both Doug Brinkley and Bill Burkett are backing away from statements attributed to them.
Burkett says he did not tell a Texas paper that he offered documents to Joe Lockhart of the Kerry campaign.
Brinkley says that he statement that Kerry "is not the hero we thought he was" was taken out of context by the New York Times.
I wonder if there were any calls from the Kerry campaign or the DNC to either Burkett or Brinkley. Sounds a bit fishy.
Both Doug Brinkley and Bill Burkett are backing away from statements attributed to them.
Burkett says he did not tell a Texas paper that he offered documents to Joe Lockhart of the Kerry campaign.
Brinkley says that he statement that Kerry "is not the hero we thought he was" was taken out of context by the New York Times.
I wonder if there were any calls from the Kerry campaign or the DNC to either Burkett or Brinkley. Sounds a bit fishy.
Items From the Kerry Spot on National Review Online
ODD CRITICAL QUOTE FROM BRINKLEY
Remember Douglas Brinkley? The historian who wrote "Tour of Duty," the biography of John Kerry's war years, er, months?
He's quoted in the New York Times today, saying something rather odd:
"Every American now knows that there's something really screwy about George Bush and the National Guard, and they know that John Kerry was not the war hero we thought he was," said Douglas Brinkley, the historian and author of a friendly biography of Mr. Kerry's war years, acknowledging that Mr. Kerry's opponents had succeeded in raising questions about his service.
"It's kind of neutralized itself, just by tiring everybody out," Mr. Brinkley said.
Thought One: What is screwy about George Bush and the National Guard? Please cite a witness that has neither claimed that Bush was "selected, not elected" (Knox) or raised a half million dollars for the Kerry campaign (Ben Barnes).
Thought Two: Gee, Mr. Brinkley, who led us to believe that John Kerry was "the war hero we thought he was"? It wouldn't be someone who wrote a glossy biography that ignored negative accounts and painted Kerry in the best possible light, now would it?
AP: BUSH UP 7
AP: Bush has a 7-point lead over Sen. John Kerry - 52 percent to 45 percent among likely voters - in the AP-Ipsos survey less than six weeks before the Nov. 2 election. Independent Ralph Nader was backed by 1 percent.
SO WHAT DID BURKETT AND LOCKHART TALK ABOUT?
Bill Burkett's interview with the Fort Worth Star Telegram is... odd. The most interesting point would appear to be this section:
Burkett said he agreed to a taped interview with Rather on Monday as suspicion about the documents mounted. Key portions of the interview were never aired, he said.
"He snipped it apart to cover them," he said. "That's all that that evening news was — to find a fall guy. And it was me.
"By his action and inaction, Dan Rather ruined my reputation in front of 70 million people."
Burkett, a West Texas rancher and known critic of Bush, denied that his work with CBS was done at the behest of Democrat John Kerry's presidential campaign.
He said, however, that during the meeting in which he gave the documents to CBS, he was also told by a producer that his phone number would be passed on to Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart.
"I was absolutely and clearly told that that was as far as anyone could go without crossing the line of [journalistic] ethics," Burkett said.
During a single phone conversation with Lockhart, Burkett said he suggested a "couple of concepts on what I thought [Kerry] had to do" to beat Bush. In return, he said, Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents."
According to the Associated Press, Lockhart said he listened to some campaign advice from Burkett for a few minutes and does not recall talking about Bush's National Guard records.
Of course, how reliable is anything Burkett says now?
Of course, how reliabe is anything that Joe Lockhart says at any time?
Remember Douglas Brinkley? The historian who wrote "Tour of Duty," the biography of John Kerry's war years, er, months?
He's quoted in the New York Times today, saying something rather odd:
"Every American now knows that there's something really screwy about George Bush and the National Guard, and they know that John Kerry was not the war hero we thought he was," said Douglas Brinkley, the historian and author of a friendly biography of Mr. Kerry's war years, acknowledging that Mr. Kerry's opponents had succeeded in raising questions about his service.
"It's kind of neutralized itself, just by tiring everybody out," Mr. Brinkley said.
Thought One: What is screwy about George Bush and the National Guard? Please cite a witness that has neither claimed that Bush was "selected, not elected" (Knox) or raised a half million dollars for the Kerry campaign (Ben Barnes).
Thought Two: Gee, Mr. Brinkley, who led us to believe that John Kerry was "the war hero we thought he was"? It wouldn't be someone who wrote a glossy biography that ignored negative accounts and painted Kerry in the best possible light, now would it?
AP: BUSH UP 7
AP: Bush has a 7-point lead over Sen. John Kerry - 52 percent to 45 percent among likely voters - in the AP-Ipsos survey less than six weeks before the Nov. 2 election. Independent Ralph Nader was backed by 1 percent.
SO WHAT DID BURKETT AND LOCKHART TALK ABOUT?
Bill Burkett's interview with the Fort Worth Star Telegram is... odd. The most interesting point would appear to be this section:
Burkett said he agreed to a taped interview with Rather on Monday as suspicion about the documents mounted. Key portions of the interview were never aired, he said.
"He snipped it apart to cover them," he said. "That's all that that evening news was — to find a fall guy. And it was me.
"By his action and inaction, Dan Rather ruined my reputation in front of 70 million people."
Burkett, a West Texas rancher and known critic of Bush, denied that his work with CBS was done at the behest of Democrat John Kerry's presidential campaign.
He said, however, that during the meeting in which he gave the documents to CBS, he was also told by a producer that his phone number would be passed on to Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart.
"I was absolutely and clearly told that that was as far as anyone could go without crossing the line of [journalistic] ethics," Burkett said.
During a single phone conversation with Lockhart, Burkett said he suggested a "couple of concepts on what I thought [Kerry] had to do" to beat Bush. In return, he said, Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents."
According to the Associated Press, Lockhart said he listened to some campaign advice from Burkett for a few minutes and does not recall talking about Bush's National Guard records.
Of course, how reliable is anything Burkett says now?
Of course, how reliabe is anything that Joe Lockhart says at any time?
Tidbits - 9/24/04
Senator John Kerry made a strategic error yesterday.
First, although he is still a member of the Senate, John Kerry did not show up for a joint session of Congress to hear from interim Prime Minister of Iraq, Ayad Allawi. This demonstrates a lack of understanding of the role of the interim Prime Minister and his message to his US allies. It also shows that Kerry still does not understand the complex issues in Iraq. John Kerry has been AWOL from the Senate for most of the year and yet he still receives his Senate salary and benefits.
Second, Kerry did not attempt to contact or meet with Allawi during his stay in the US. If John Kerry were elected President he would have to work with Allawi on Iraqi matters. This obvious snub of a world leader demonstrates Kerry's lack of interest in working with foreign governments. The senator may not like the war in Iraq, but he must meet with its leaders. Kerry showed a lack of leadership on this one.
Third, Kerry criticized Alawi's speech. The senator said that he did not understand the problems in Iraq. As noted here yesterday, John Kerry has never visited Iraq nor spoken to any of its leaders. If anyone is out of touch with the Iraq situation, it is Kerry.
Now for some interesting items.
+I wonder how Dan Rather will report this.
The chairman and CEO of Viacom, the parent company of CBS, Sumner Redstone has declared that he endorses George Bush.
Saying that a Republican administration is better for Viacom and business, Redstone made his remarks at a Forbes conference in Hong Kong.
At the same conference, Redstone noted that "appropriate" consequences will occur at CBS News after the report of the investigative team.
Viacom CEO for Bush
+Burkett, Who Lied, Says Lockhart Lied
(CNSNews.com) - Did Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart lie about his telephone conversation with Texas Democrat Bill Burkett? A report in Friday's Fort Worth Star-Telegram raises questions about Lockhart's account of his telephone conversation with Burkett. In a Fox News interview earlier this week, Lockhart -- a senior adviser to the Kerry campaign -- admitted he called Burkett at the request of a CBS producer. Lockhart said he and Burkett never discussed the memos that Burkett had given CBS News - memos that discredited George W. Bush's National Guard service and are believed to be forgeries. But on Friday, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram quoted Burkett as saying that Joe Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents." Although CBS News described Burkett as an "unimpeachable source," Burkett admitted in a later interview with Dan Rather that he had lied about where he got the National Guard memos.
+The Federal Election Commission has received a complaint against CBS for colluding with the Kerry campaign in its "political attack" on George Bush.
The complaint filed by the Center for Individual Freedom describes the connection between CBS and the Kerry campaign as improper and in conflict with journalistic standards. It believes that CBS had violated federal campaign laws.
CBS Accused of 'Political Attack' in Federal Election Complaint -- 09/24/2004
The complaint in pdf format
More later
First, although he is still a member of the Senate, John Kerry did not show up for a joint session of Congress to hear from interim Prime Minister of Iraq, Ayad Allawi. This demonstrates a lack of understanding of the role of the interim Prime Minister and his message to his US allies. It also shows that Kerry still does not understand the complex issues in Iraq. John Kerry has been AWOL from the Senate for most of the year and yet he still receives his Senate salary and benefits.
Second, Kerry did not attempt to contact or meet with Allawi during his stay in the US. If John Kerry were elected President he would have to work with Allawi on Iraqi matters. This obvious snub of a world leader demonstrates Kerry's lack of interest in working with foreign governments. The senator may not like the war in Iraq, but he must meet with its leaders. Kerry showed a lack of leadership on this one.
Third, Kerry criticized Alawi's speech. The senator said that he did not understand the problems in Iraq. As noted here yesterday, John Kerry has never visited Iraq nor spoken to any of its leaders. If anyone is out of touch with the Iraq situation, it is Kerry.
Now for some interesting items.
+I wonder how Dan Rather will report this.
The chairman and CEO of Viacom, the parent company of CBS, Sumner Redstone has declared that he endorses George Bush.
Saying that a Republican administration is better for Viacom and business, Redstone made his remarks at a Forbes conference in Hong Kong.
At the same conference, Redstone noted that "appropriate" consequences will occur at CBS News after the report of the investigative team.
Viacom CEO for Bush
+Burkett, Who Lied, Says Lockhart Lied
(CNSNews.com) - Did Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart lie about his telephone conversation with Texas Democrat Bill Burkett? A report in Friday's Fort Worth Star-Telegram raises questions about Lockhart's account of his telephone conversation with Burkett. In a Fox News interview earlier this week, Lockhart -- a senior adviser to the Kerry campaign -- admitted he called Burkett at the request of a CBS producer. Lockhart said he and Burkett never discussed the memos that Burkett had given CBS News - memos that discredited George W. Bush's National Guard service and are believed to be forgeries. But on Friday, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram quoted Burkett as saying that Joe Lockhart tried to "convince me as to why I should give them the documents." Although CBS News described Burkett as an "unimpeachable source," Burkett admitted in a later interview with Dan Rather that he had lied about where he got the National Guard memos.
+The Federal Election Commission has received a complaint against CBS for colluding with the Kerry campaign in its "political attack" on George Bush.
The complaint filed by the Center for Individual Freedom describes the connection between CBS and the Kerry campaign as improper and in conflict with journalistic standards. It believes that CBS had violated federal campaign laws.
CBS Accused of 'Political Attack' in Federal Election Complaint -- 09/24/2004
The complaint in pdf format
More later
Thursday, September 23, 2004
Kerry: Allawi's Take on Iraq Unrealistic
Although not attending a joint session of Congress, Sen. John Kerry has the nerve to criticize Iraq's interim Prime Minister, Ayad Allawi.
The senator said in Columbus, Ohio, that Allawi's speech contradicts what is happening in Iraq.
Hold on Senator, Allawi lives in Iraq. He is the interim Prime Minister. If anyone knows what the situation in Iraq is, it is him not you.
Remember, Senator Kerry has NEVER been to Iraq. Sen. Kerry has missed most, if not all, Senate working days since the first of the year. Sen. Kerry missed over 75% of Intelligence Committee meetings.
So, if anyone is unrealistic about Iraq, it is you Senator Kerry.
Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Kerry: Allawi's Take on Iraq Unrealistic
The senator said in Columbus, Ohio, that Allawi's speech contradicts what is happening in Iraq.
Hold on Senator, Allawi lives in Iraq. He is the interim Prime Minister. If anyone knows what the situation in Iraq is, it is him not you.
Remember, Senator Kerry has NEVER been to Iraq. Sen. Kerry has missed most, if not all, Senate working days since the first of the year. Sen. Kerry missed over 75% of Intelligence Committee meetings.
So, if anyone is unrealistic about Iraq, it is you Senator Kerry.
Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Kerry: Allawi's Take on Iraq Unrealistic
Gallup Finds Trust in Media at New Low
A new Gallup Poll taken Sept 13-15 shows a significant decline in the public's trust of the news media.
The poll shows that only 44% have trust in the media to accurately and fairly report.
This is a significant decline from one year ago when 54% trusted the media.
Thanks, Dan: Gallup Finds Trust in Media at New Low
The poll shows that only 44% have trust in the media to accurately and fairly report.
This is a significant decline from one year ago when 54% trusted the media.
Thanks, Dan: Gallup Finds Trust in Media at New Low
Dan Rather: Fairly Unbalanced by Ann Coulter
Here is this week's column from Ann Coulter.
It's all about Rather, Burkett, forgeries, and how Walter Cronkite gave aid and comfort to the North Vietnamese.
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Dan Rather: Fairly Unbalanced by Ann Coulter
It's all about Rather, Burkett, forgeries, and how Walter Cronkite gave aid and comfort to the North Vietnamese.
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Dan Rather: Fairly Unbalanced by Ann Coulter
Items From the Kerry Spot on National Review Online
SAY WHAT?
Take a look at this bit from James G. Lakely's story in today's Washington Times:
The president has charged that if Mr. Kerry had his way in the run-up to the war — waiting long enough to allow inspectors to reveal that Saddam Hussein had no stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons — the Iraqi dictator would still be in power.
Mr. Kerry disputed that argument, saying the lack of such weapons would have eroded Saddam's ability to retain control of the country.
"If you don't have weapons of mass destruction, believe me, Saddam Hussein is a very different person," Mr. Kerry said. "That's what kept him power. And I believe Saddam Hussein would not be in power."
He seems to be suggesting that weapons inspectors would have concluded, definitively, that Saddam did not have weapons, and that once that happened, someone would have deposed Saddam. Uh, who?
If Kerry said this, it is obvious that he is truly out of touch with the issue and mainstream America. How can anyone, no matter the party or ideology, believe that Saddam would have be overthrown by anyone. The Iraqi people would have never known that WMDs were not found.
This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard Kerry say. G
BUSH UP 10 IN WISCONSIN?
An ABC News poll finds "Bush leading Kerry by 53 percent to 43 percent among likely voters in Wisconsin, with 1 percent for Ralph Nader. (Nader is on the ballot for now. Excluding him it's a similar 54 percent to 44 percent Bush lead.) Among the broader group of all registered voters, it's 50 percent-44 percent-2 percent with Nader, and 51 percent to 45 percent without him."
Also interesting: "Despite Bush's lead in the presidential race, incumbent Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold holds a 51 percent to 45 percent advantage among likely voters over construction executive and former Army officer Tim Michels in their race."
NBC POLL - SMALL LEAD FOR BUSH
I hear through the grapevine that the NBC-WSJ poll coming out tonight has Bush up 50 to 46 among likely voters, up 48 to 45 among registered.
UPDATE: The specifics are out. I cannot believe the guys at The Note were talking about this poll like it was good news for the Kerry campaign. It's obviously better to be down by three or four than to be down double digits, but these results shouldn't be a reason to break out the party hats among Democrats. Some of the trouble spots for Kerry:
For example, he has just a 48-45 percent lead among women voters. By comparison, exit polls from 2000 show that that Gore won the women's vote, 54-43...
Fifty-four percent of respondents say that the campaign doesn't have a message, or that they don't know what a Kerry-Edwards team would do if elected. That's compared with just 36 percent who believe the campaign has a message. Conversely, 68 percent say the Bush campaign has a message, while just 23 percent think it doesn't.
I hear that the additional data released later tonight will reveal that when Kerry supporters are asked whether they're voting for Kerry and Edwards, or against Bush and Cheney, 36 percent say they're for Kerry; 51 percent say they're against Bush.
For Bush supporters, 77 percent say their vote is a vote for Bush, only 14 percent say their vote is a vote against Kerry.
THE TRIBUNE ACCUSES KERRY OF 'CHANNELING DEAN'
The editors of the Chicago Tribune offer a surprisingly tough editorial on Kerry's shifting views on the Iraq war. The title is "Channeling Howard Dean." An excerpt:
Kerry gave little definition to the change of course he represents. He did, though, say: "We could begin to withdraw U.S. forces starting next summer and realistically aim to bring all our troops home within the next four years."
That's the kind of specificity that different listeners hear in different ways. Appreciative Americans might fairly conclude that Kerry wants to bring our boys and girls home. Other groups — nervous Iraqi citizens awaiting democracy, the vicious insurgents who plague them, and the coalition forces serving alongside U.S. troops — might fairly conclude that the Democrat who would be president is primarily interested in getting the heck out of Iraq ASAP.
Bush, too, says he wants to bring the troops home. But he is — as he has been for three years — steadfastly committed to defeating terrorists, challenging the governments that give them succor, and projecting democracy as broadly as possible in the Middle East as a step toward defanging Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.
Kerry, by contrast, speaks less ambitiously about fighting "our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists." A logician devoted to this nation's long-range security — not just to making today's problems go away — might conclude that Kerry's goal is necessary but by no means sufficient.
Elections are approaching in both the U.S. and Iraq. Officials in both countries have said that terrorists could escalate their violence in order to break the will of Americans and Iraqis alike.
It will be interesting to see how Americans react to Kerry's bleak prognosis. One crucial task will be to make sure he doesn't come across as a prospective commander in chief who, having long defended his war authorization vote, now thinks insurgents have made the fight too tough.
Because, when he delivered that speech in Des Moines, Kerry also eviscerated Howard Dean for having been "all over the lot" on Iraq: "One moment he supported authorizing the use of force, the next he criticized those who did."
NOTE: The Chicago Tribune has rarely, if ever, supported a Republican candidate for any office.
Take a look at this bit from James G. Lakely's story in today's Washington Times:
The president has charged that if Mr. Kerry had his way in the run-up to the war — waiting long enough to allow inspectors to reveal that Saddam Hussein had no stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons — the Iraqi dictator would still be in power.
Mr. Kerry disputed that argument, saying the lack of such weapons would have eroded Saddam's ability to retain control of the country.
"If you don't have weapons of mass destruction, believe me, Saddam Hussein is a very different person," Mr. Kerry said. "That's what kept him power. And I believe Saddam Hussein would not be in power."
He seems to be suggesting that weapons inspectors would have concluded, definitively, that Saddam did not have weapons, and that once that happened, someone would have deposed Saddam. Uh, who?
If Kerry said this, it is obvious that he is truly out of touch with the issue and mainstream America. How can anyone, no matter the party or ideology, believe that Saddam would have be overthrown by anyone. The Iraqi people would have never known that WMDs were not found.
This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard Kerry say. G
BUSH UP 10 IN WISCONSIN?
An ABC News poll finds "Bush leading Kerry by 53 percent to 43 percent among likely voters in Wisconsin, with 1 percent for Ralph Nader. (Nader is on the ballot for now. Excluding him it's a similar 54 percent to 44 percent Bush lead.) Among the broader group of all registered voters, it's 50 percent-44 percent-2 percent with Nader, and 51 percent to 45 percent without him."
Also interesting: "Despite Bush's lead in the presidential race, incumbent Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold holds a 51 percent to 45 percent advantage among likely voters over construction executive and former Army officer Tim Michels in their race."
NBC POLL - SMALL LEAD FOR BUSH
I hear through the grapevine that the NBC-WSJ poll coming out tonight has Bush up 50 to 46 among likely voters, up 48 to 45 among registered.
UPDATE: The specifics are out. I cannot believe the guys at The Note were talking about this poll like it was good news for the Kerry campaign. It's obviously better to be down by three or four than to be down double digits, but these results shouldn't be a reason to break out the party hats among Democrats. Some of the trouble spots for Kerry:
For example, he has just a 48-45 percent lead among women voters. By comparison, exit polls from 2000 show that that Gore won the women's vote, 54-43...
Fifty-four percent of respondents say that the campaign doesn't have a message, or that they don't know what a Kerry-Edwards team would do if elected. That's compared with just 36 percent who believe the campaign has a message. Conversely, 68 percent say the Bush campaign has a message, while just 23 percent think it doesn't.
I hear that the additional data released later tonight will reveal that when Kerry supporters are asked whether they're voting for Kerry and Edwards, or against Bush and Cheney, 36 percent say they're for Kerry; 51 percent say they're against Bush.
For Bush supporters, 77 percent say their vote is a vote for Bush, only 14 percent say their vote is a vote against Kerry.
THE TRIBUNE ACCUSES KERRY OF 'CHANNELING DEAN'
The editors of the Chicago Tribune offer a surprisingly tough editorial on Kerry's shifting views on the Iraq war. The title is "Channeling Howard Dean." An excerpt:
Kerry gave little definition to the change of course he represents. He did, though, say: "We could begin to withdraw U.S. forces starting next summer and realistically aim to bring all our troops home within the next four years."
That's the kind of specificity that different listeners hear in different ways. Appreciative Americans might fairly conclude that Kerry wants to bring our boys and girls home. Other groups — nervous Iraqi citizens awaiting democracy, the vicious insurgents who plague them, and the coalition forces serving alongside U.S. troops — might fairly conclude that the Democrat who would be president is primarily interested in getting the heck out of Iraq ASAP.
Bush, too, says he wants to bring the troops home. But he is — as he has been for three years — steadfastly committed to defeating terrorists, challenging the governments that give them succor, and projecting democracy as broadly as possible in the Middle East as a step toward defanging Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.
Kerry, by contrast, speaks less ambitiously about fighting "our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists." A logician devoted to this nation's long-range security — not just to making today's problems go away — might conclude that Kerry's goal is necessary but by no means sufficient.
Elections are approaching in both the U.S. and Iraq. Officials in both countries have said that terrorists could escalate their violence in order to break the will of Americans and Iraqis alike.
It will be interesting to see how Americans react to Kerry's bleak prognosis. One crucial task will be to make sure he doesn't come across as a prospective commander in chief who, having long defended his war authorization vote, now thinks insurgents have made the fight too tough.
Because, when he delivered that speech in Des Moines, Kerry also eviscerated Howard Dean for having been "all over the lot" on Iraq: "One moment he supported authorizing the use of force, the next he criticized those who did."
NOTE: The Chicago Tribune has rarely, if ever, supported a Republican candidate for any office.
Helen Thomas defends Rather
The self-termed "Dean of the White House press corps," Helen Thomas, is at it again.
Instead of speaking out for journalistic ethics, the aging, left-wing, anti-Bush columnist defends Dan Rather.
WorldNetDaily: Helen Thomas defends Rather
Instead of speaking out for journalistic ethics, the aging, left-wing, anti-Bush columnist defends Dan Rather.
WorldNetDaily: Helen Thomas defends Rather
Tidbits - 9/23/04
There is some good news from Congress.
A congressional conference committee has passed legislation that will extend the middle class tax cuts for an additional 5 years without any loopholes tying the cuts to spending cuts. The tax cuts were expected to expire at the end of this year.
Extended tax breaks include the child tax credit, easing of the marriage penalty, and the expanded 10% tax bracket.
The bill is expected to be taken up in the House today (Thursday) and by the Senate Friday or early next week.
The extension of the tax cuts is a victory for the White House and will bolster the President's re-election with voters.
Even in this very partisan election year, House and Senate Democrats are likely to vote for the measure. Even Tom Daschle (D-SD) is said to be in favor of the extension. Since Daschle is in a very tight race for re-election, he is likely to vote for anything that makes him look more Republican.
Finally, has anyone noticed how many weeks of "vacation" the House and Senate receive? They claim that most of it is for district work. Have you ever tried to contact your congressmen or senator during these periods? You will discover that most of the time during a district work period is spent on junkets paid for by taxpayers or some special interest.
ABCNEWS.com : Middle-Class Tax Cuts Extension Approved
+The Kerry campaign has cancelled ad buys in four states.
Usually when a campaign cancels advertising it is because they see little, if any, hope to win that state.
The four states include Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri.
The only state that is a surprise is Missouri. Until recently, this was one of the battleground states that Kerry hoped to take away from Bush. I guess recent polls have changed the campaign's mind.
FOXNews.com - You Decide 2004 - Kerry Kills Ad Buy in Four States
+The DNC will not give up on this obviously false story.
The DNC and chairman, Terry MacAuliffe, still insist that Karl Rove is the source of the documents used by Dan Rather on his 60 Minutes story. If this were even partially true, it would make CBS look more partisan than it is. That is not possible.
The DNC continues with this mantra event though CBS unearthed the source as Bill Burkett. Burkett says someone else gave him the documents.
The DNC continues with this story even though a CBS producer, Mary Mapes, put Burkett in contact with Joe Lockhart at the Kerry campaign. A violation of CBS policy and journalistic ethics.
While I know that the DNC is becoming more and more desperate with each new poll, they are making themselves look more foolish each day.
Rove scoffs at charge he was CBS source - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - September 23, 2004
More later.
A congressional conference committee has passed legislation that will extend the middle class tax cuts for an additional 5 years without any loopholes tying the cuts to spending cuts. The tax cuts were expected to expire at the end of this year.
Extended tax breaks include the child tax credit, easing of the marriage penalty, and the expanded 10% tax bracket.
The bill is expected to be taken up in the House today (Thursday) and by the Senate Friday or early next week.
The extension of the tax cuts is a victory for the White House and will bolster the President's re-election with voters.
Even in this very partisan election year, House and Senate Democrats are likely to vote for the measure. Even Tom Daschle (D-SD) is said to be in favor of the extension. Since Daschle is in a very tight race for re-election, he is likely to vote for anything that makes him look more Republican.
Finally, has anyone noticed how many weeks of "vacation" the House and Senate receive? They claim that most of it is for district work. Have you ever tried to contact your congressmen or senator during these periods? You will discover that most of the time during a district work period is spent on junkets paid for by taxpayers or some special interest.
ABCNEWS.com : Middle-Class Tax Cuts Extension Approved
+The Kerry campaign has cancelled ad buys in four states.
Usually when a campaign cancels advertising it is because they see little, if any, hope to win that state.
The four states include Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri.
The only state that is a surprise is Missouri. Until recently, this was one of the battleground states that Kerry hoped to take away from Bush. I guess recent polls have changed the campaign's mind.
FOXNews.com - You Decide 2004 - Kerry Kills Ad Buy in Four States
+The DNC will not give up on this obviously false story.
The DNC and chairman, Terry MacAuliffe, still insist that Karl Rove is the source of the documents used by Dan Rather on his 60 Minutes story. If this were even partially true, it would make CBS look more partisan than it is. That is not possible.
The DNC continues with this mantra event though CBS unearthed the source as Bill Burkett. Burkett says someone else gave him the documents.
The DNC continues with this story even though a CBS producer, Mary Mapes, put Burkett in contact with Joe Lockhart at the Kerry campaign. A violation of CBS policy and journalistic ethics.
While I know that the DNC is becoming more and more desperate with each new poll, they are making themselves look more foolish each day.
Rove scoffs at charge he was CBS source - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - September 23, 2004
More later.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Commission on Debates Rejects Prompt Signing of Campaigns' Accord on the Events
Although the campaigns have agreed in principal to the upcoming debates, a list of rules may derail at least one debate.
The document outlines rules for all the debates, but concentrates on the town hall style meeting scheduled for St. Louis. The guidelines concern the questions, the questioners, and the moderator of the debate.
In addition, the guidelines submitted by the campaigns require that not only the Commission agree and sign the document, but also the moderator of the event must sign. Thus far the moderators are hesitant.
The document also requires that the document be signed by all participants, the commission, and the moderators seven days in advance of the first debate. That means it needs to be signed by tomorrow.
The Commissionn has rejected that deadline saying that the candidates invited to the debates will not be decided until Friday.
So, how many debates will there be?
The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Commission on Debates Rejects Prompt Signing of Campaigns' Accord on the Events
The document outlines rules for all the debates, but concentrates on the town hall style meeting scheduled for St. Louis. The guidelines concern the questions, the questioners, and the moderator of the debate.
In addition, the guidelines submitted by the campaigns require that not only the Commission agree and sign the document, but also the moderator of the event must sign. Thus far the moderators are hesitant.
The document also requires that the document be signed by all participants, the commission, and the moderators seven days in advance of the first debate. That means it needs to be signed by tomorrow.
The Commissionn has rejected that deadline saying that the candidates invited to the debates will not be decided until Friday.
So, how many debates will there be?
The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Commission on Debates Rejects Prompt Signing of Campaigns' Accord on the Events
Items From the Kerry Spot on National Review Online
BUSH HAS NEW AD FEATURING KERRY WINDSURFING
Boy, Kerry's windsurfing must poll terribly.
The Bush campaign is rolling out a new ad, featuring Kerry windsurfing, with the image of him surfing, changing from left to right and back and forth, as an announcer points out his rapidly-changing positions for and against the same bill or issue.
The closing line: "John Kerry: Whichever way the wind blows."
THE MEDIA ANGER AGAINST CBS BUILDS
From The New York Daily News' Michael Goodwin:
Would you trust anything you saw on CBS now? I wouldn't. Until we know exactly what happened, the entire news division has forfeited our trust and the benefit of the doubt. Guilty until proven innocent.
Even David Letterman, the network's funnyman, poked fun at the news division. His Monday show spoofed an evening-news lineup, then asked, "Can you guess which story isn't true?" Ha-ha.
The line that you're in trouble when late-night comedians make fun of you has a new corollary: You're in really big trouble when your own comedian makes fun of you.
Maybe Rather will come to his senses. He told The New York Times he wasn't worried about himself, adding: "I am concerned about the reputation, integrity and honor of CBS News and the people that I work with. . . . I love the place. I would never do anything to harm it at whatever expense to myself."
Okay, big fella, prove it. Step aside until all the facts are on the table. In this case, that's what love means.
As the Daily News is a non-conservative New York paper, this article is likely to cause a stir in the CBS Newsroom.
COVERAGE OF THE SWIFT BOAT VET AD
From the Washington Post:
The meeting, however, was not a secret. Kerry, a leading antiwar activist at the time, mentioned it in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April of that year. "I have been to Paris," he testified. "I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and Provisional Revolutionary Government," the latter a South Vietnamese communist group with ties to the Viet Cong.
Kerry's campaign said earlier this year that he met on the trip with Nguyen Thi Binh, then foreign minister of the PRG and a top negotiator at the talks. Kerry acknowledged in that testimony that even going to the peace talks as a private citizen was at the "borderline" of what was permissible under U.S. law, which forbids citizens from negotiating treaties with foreign governments. But his campaign said he never engaged in negotiations or attended any formal sessions of the talks.
"This is more trash from a group that's doing the Bush campaign's dirty work," Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton said. "Their charges are as credible as a supermarket rag."
In an interview yesterday, John O'Neill, an organizer of the Swift boat group and co-author of the anti-Kerry book "Unfit for Command," said it would be "unprecedented" for a future commander in chief to have met with enemy leaders. "It would be like an American today meeting with the heads of al Qaeda," he said.
Thought One: Boy, another great, specific, detail-filled rebuttal from the Kerry campaign! Couldn't they have at least tried to argue that the Paris meeting was innocent, and try to describe what Kerry did at the meeting?
Thought Two: "It would be like an American today meeting with the heads of al Qaeda." Team Kerry better have a good defense to refute that talking point, because if that one sentence comparison breaks through the media static and gets into voter's heads, Kerry will make Walter Mondale look like Bill Clinton.
KERRY WAS BRIEFED ABOUT LOCKHART'S CALL?
From Wednesday's edition of the New York Times:
Michael D. McCurry, a former press secretary to President Bill Clinton who recently signed on as an adviser to Mr. Kerry, told reporters traveling with Mr. Kerry that the campaign was trying to determine who in its ranks had been in contact with Mr. Burkett.
Mr. McCurry said that Mr. Lockhart had approached Mary Beth Cahill, Mr. Kerry's campaign manager, in the last few days to tell her that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr. Burkett. Ms. Cahill, he said, told Mr. Kerry, who did not think anything needed to be done in response.
Mr. McCurry said that he believed that the only other contact was a telephone conversation between Mr. Burkett and former Senator Max Cleland of Georgia, a prominent Kerry supporter among veterans.
Oh, how I hope John Kerry's response to Cahill was, "Uh, Mary Beth, why on earth was Lockhart wasting his time talking to that guy? Didn't I hire old Bug-Eyes to, you know, help with the campaign's message?"
Oh how I suspect it wasn't.
Another interesting bit from that story:
"I think, as a practical matter, that anything about Bush's record has become about the CBS documents," said Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster. "It is hard to generate a story about Bush's record that isn't regurgitating how Dan Rather apologized for those documents."
Boy, Kerry's windsurfing must poll terribly.
The Bush campaign is rolling out a new ad, featuring Kerry windsurfing, with the image of him surfing, changing from left to right and back and forth, as an announcer points out his rapidly-changing positions for and against the same bill or issue.
The closing line: "John Kerry: Whichever way the wind blows."
THE MEDIA ANGER AGAINST CBS BUILDS
From The New York Daily News' Michael Goodwin:
Would you trust anything you saw on CBS now? I wouldn't. Until we know exactly what happened, the entire news division has forfeited our trust and the benefit of the doubt. Guilty until proven innocent.
Even David Letterman, the network's funnyman, poked fun at the news division. His Monday show spoofed an evening-news lineup, then asked, "Can you guess which story isn't true?" Ha-ha.
The line that you're in trouble when late-night comedians make fun of you has a new corollary: You're in really big trouble when your own comedian makes fun of you.
Maybe Rather will come to his senses. He told The New York Times he wasn't worried about himself, adding: "I am concerned about the reputation, integrity and honor of CBS News and the people that I work with. . . . I love the place. I would never do anything to harm it at whatever expense to myself."
Okay, big fella, prove it. Step aside until all the facts are on the table. In this case, that's what love means.
As the Daily News is a non-conservative New York paper, this article is likely to cause a stir in the CBS Newsroom.
COVERAGE OF THE SWIFT BOAT VET AD
From the Washington Post:
The meeting, however, was not a secret. Kerry, a leading antiwar activist at the time, mentioned it in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April of that year. "I have been to Paris," he testified. "I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and Provisional Revolutionary Government," the latter a South Vietnamese communist group with ties to the Viet Cong.
Kerry's campaign said earlier this year that he met on the trip with Nguyen Thi Binh, then foreign minister of the PRG and a top negotiator at the talks. Kerry acknowledged in that testimony that even going to the peace talks as a private citizen was at the "borderline" of what was permissible under U.S. law, which forbids citizens from negotiating treaties with foreign governments. But his campaign said he never engaged in negotiations or attended any formal sessions of the talks.
"This is more trash from a group that's doing the Bush campaign's dirty work," Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton said. "Their charges are as credible as a supermarket rag."
In an interview yesterday, John O'Neill, an organizer of the Swift boat group and co-author of the anti-Kerry book "Unfit for Command," said it would be "unprecedented" for a future commander in chief to have met with enemy leaders. "It would be like an American today meeting with the heads of al Qaeda," he said.
Thought One: Boy, another great, specific, detail-filled rebuttal from the Kerry campaign! Couldn't they have at least tried to argue that the Paris meeting was innocent, and try to describe what Kerry did at the meeting?
Thought Two: "It would be like an American today meeting with the heads of al Qaeda." Team Kerry better have a good defense to refute that talking point, because if that one sentence comparison breaks through the media static and gets into voter's heads, Kerry will make Walter Mondale look like Bill Clinton.
KERRY WAS BRIEFED ABOUT LOCKHART'S CALL?
From Wednesday's edition of the New York Times:
Michael D. McCurry, a former press secretary to President Bill Clinton who recently signed on as an adviser to Mr. Kerry, told reporters traveling with Mr. Kerry that the campaign was trying to determine who in its ranks had been in contact with Mr. Burkett.
Mr. McCurry said that Mr. Lockhart had approached Mary Beth Cahill, Mr. Kerry's campaign manager, in the last few days to tell her that he had had a brief telephone conversation with Mr. Burkett. Ms. Cahill, he said, told Mr. Kerry, who did not think anything needed to be done in response.
Mr. McCurry said that he believed that the only other contact was a telephone conversation between Mr. Burkett and former Senator Max Cleland of Georgia, a prominent Kerry supporter among veterans.
Oh, how I hope John Kerry's response to Cahill was, "Uh, Mary Beth, why on earth was Lockhart wasting his time talking to that guy? Didn't I hire old Bug-Eyes to, you know, help with the campaign's message?"
Oh how I suspect it wasn't.
Another interesting bit from that story:
"I think, as a practical matter, that anything about Bush's record has become about the CBS documents," said Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster. "It is hard to generate a story about Bush's record that isn't regurgitating how Dan Rather apologized for those documents."
Tidbits - 9/22/04
Readers may have noticed that the feature, Items From the Kerry Spot has been missing lately. The Kerry Spot is still a good resource for this blog, but lately it has become the Rather Spot. So, we will continue to watch the Kerry Spot and report to you any interesting items.
Speaking of Rathergate, there are some interesting things to report. Mary Mapes, producer of the story, made a deal with Bill Burkett, the now discredited source of the documents, to facilitate contact between Kerry campaign officials and Burkett.
While using forged documents is bad, this is a complete breach of any kind of journalistic ethics. Mapes should be dismissed for this alone. It also demonstrates how people with an agenda will do anything for a story and that CBS does have a liberal and anti Bush bias.
In a related story, Bill Burkett is planning on suing CBS News for libel. Good luck with that one.
From My Way News - Producer in Hot Water
After looking at some other sources, it looks like today will be a slow news day.
More later
Speaking of Rathergate, there are some interesting things to report. Mary Mapes, producer of the story, made a deal with Bill Burkett, the now discredited source of the documents, to facilitate contact between Kerry campaign officials and Burkett.
While using forged documents is bad, this is a complete breach of any kind of journalistic ethics. Mapes should be dismissed for this alone. It also demonstrates how people with an agenda will do anything for a story and that CBS does have a liberal and anti Bush bias.
In a related story, Bill Burkett is planning on suing CBS News for libel. Good luck with that one.
From My Way News - Producer in Hot Water
After looking at some other sources, it looks like today will be a slow news day.
More later
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Tidbits - 9/21/04
When is an apology, not an apology? When it is given by Dan Rather.
Although Rather "apologized" for documents he can no longer "vouch" for, there was several items missing.
First, Rather did not say that the documents were forgeries, only that CBS could no longer vouch for them.
Second, Rather did not apologize to his critics whose reputation he impuned by saying they were "partisan political operatives." As far as I can see the only political operative is Bill Burkett.
Although CBS was aware of his Bush-hating agenda, they still contacted him. This is the only point that CBS now concedes.
The apology was a nice try, but not enough to restore CBS' reputation.
Rather Fails to Admit Forgery or Apologize for Impugning Critics --9/21/2004-- Media Research Center
Phone Call to Burkett No Big Deal, Lockhart Says -- 09/21/2004
USATODAY.com - CBS arranged for meeting with Lockhart
+Although the documents used by CBS in the 60 Minutes story have been widely discredited, the Democratic National Committee continues to quote from them.
DNC Still Cites Discredited Memos -- 09/20/2004
+Although the Bush and Kerry teams have tenatively agreed to three Presidential Debates and a single Vice Presidential Debate, there is a new wrinkle that may derail one or more of the debates.
The Bush campaign wants CBS' Bob Schieffer removed as moderator for one of the debates.
More from the DRUDGE REPORT 2004
+Well, here's a surprise or not. Michael Moore who still wants to defeat Bush calls John Kerry a "lousy" candidate.
WorldNetDaily: Michael Moore's latest: Kerry a lousy candidate
More later.
Although Rather "apologized" for documents he can no longer "vouch" for, there was several items missing.
First, Rather did not say that the documents were forgeries, only that CBS could no longer vouch for them.
Second, Rather did not apologize to his critics whose reputation he impuned by saying they were "partisan political operatives." As far as I can see the only political operative is Bill Burkett.
Although CBS was aware of his Bush-hating agenda, they still contacted him. This is the only point that CBS now concedes.
The apology was a nice try, but not enough to restore CBS' reputation.
Rather Fails to Admit Forgery or Apologize for Impugning Critics --9/21/2004-- Media Research Center
Phone Call to Burkett No Big Deal, Lockhart Says -- 09/21/2004
USATODAY.com - CBS arranged for meeting with Lockhart
+Although the documents used by CBS in the 60 Minutes story have been widely discredited, the Democratic National Committee continues to quote from them.
DNC Still Cites Discredited Memos -- 09/20/2004
+Although the Bush and Kerry teams have tenatively agreed to three Presidential Debates and a single Vice Presidential Debate, there is a new wrinkle that may derail one or more of the debates.
The Bush campaign wants CBS' Bob Schieffer removed as moderator for one of the debates.
More from the DRUDGE REPORT 2004
+Well, here's a surprise or not. Michael Moore who still wants to defeat Bush calls John Kerry a "lousy" candidate.
WorldNetDaily: Michael Moore's latest: Kerry a lousy candidate
More later.
Monday, September 20, 2004
Initial Reaction
My initial reaction to CBS anchor, Dan Rather's, apology as broadcast this evening is, "So What."
While saying, "I'm sorry," the discredited anchor/reporter has done little to support his case of a "mistake."
During the story Rather, again, relied on Bill Burkett for direction and the "truth." Burkett still denies he altered the documents and will not disclose how he received them. By continuing to use Burkett, the story and the loss of credibility for CBS News will more than likely continue.
Burkett did provide some additional information. He aid that he was "pressured" by CBS staff to produce the document. He did not say that he was asked about their authenticity. I am certain that the "pressure" came from Mary Mapes, and, to a certain extent, Dan Rather.
Nevertheless, CBS rushed to use the documents, but the "true" source of the documents remains a question.
While saying, "I'm sorry," the discredited anchor/reporter has done little to support his case of a "mistake."
During the story Rather, again, relied on Bill Burkett for direction and the "truth." Burkett still denies he altered the documents and will not disclose how he received them. By continuing to use Burkett, the story and the loss of credibility for CBS News will more than likely continue.
Burkett did provide some additional information. He aid that he was "pressured" by CBS staff to produce the document. He did not say that he was asked about their authenticity. I am certain that the "pressure" came from Mary Mapes, and, to a certain extent, Dan Rather.
Nevertheless, CBS rushed to use the documents, but the "true" source of the documents remains a question.
G O P.com :: RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie Statement on CBS
Here is the response to the "Rather" statement earlier today.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Christine Iverson
202-863-8614
Washington, DC--Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie issued the following statement on CBS's admission today that memos regarding the President's National Guard service are not real.
"We accept CBS's apology for a breach of the journalistic standards that provide the American people confidence in news organizations, but some disturbing questions remain unanswered.
"CBS has now answered questions about the authenticity of the documents but questions remain surrounding who created the documents, who provided them to CBS and if Senator Kerry's supporters, Party committee, or campaign played any role.
"Did Bill Burkett, Democrat activist and Kerry campaign supporter, who passed information to the DNC, work with Kerry campaign surrogate Max Cleland? Did Bill Burkett's talks with "senior" Kerry campaign officials include discussions of the now discredited documents? Was the launch of the Democrat National Committee's Operation Fortunate Son designed with knowledge of the faked forged memos? Terry McAuliffe said yesterday that no one at the DNC or Kerry campaign, "had anything to do with the preparations of the documents," but what about the distribution or dissemination?
"In an effort to regain the trust of the American people CBS should not only investigate the process that led to the use of these documents but they should identify immediately those engaged in possible criminal activity who attempted to use a news organization to affect the outcome of a Presidential election in its closing days."
END
Some of the questioned raised in the RNC statement have been somewhat answered.
Bill Burkett has said that he contacted officials at the Kerry campaign including Max Cleland.
Other stories have shown that staffers at the DNC and the Kerry campaign saw the documents, but had "concerns" about the authenticity. Probably the only people who believed the documents were true were Bush-basher Mary Mapes, producer of the 60 Minutes story, and Dan Rather.
It is likely, based on recent statements by Burkett, that the Kerry campaign passed the documents onto CBS or told Burkett which news organization would be most friendly to the false allegations.
As noted earlier, CBS' credibility has been damaged. Dan Rather's credibility has been further damaged. It is unlikely to regain any hint of "fair" reporting as long as Mary Mapes is a producer AND Dan Rather is managing editor and anchor.
CBS needs to make some serious changes to bolster sagging ratings and advertising revenue. With Dan Rather "in charge" it will be a very tough road.
G O P.com :: RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie Statement on CBS:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Christine Iverson
202-863-8614
Washington, DC--Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie issued the following statement on CBS's admission today that memos regarding the President's National Guard service are not real.
"We accept CBS's apology for a breach of the journalistic standards that provide the American people confidence in news organizations, but some disturbing questions remain unanswered.
"CBS has now answered questions about the authenticity of the documents but questions remain surrounding who created the documents, who provided them to CBS and if Senator Kerry's supporters, Party committee, or campaign played any role.
"Did Bill Burkett, Democrat activist and Kerry campaign supporter, who passed information to the DNC, work with Kerry campaign surrogate Max Cleland? Did Bill Burkett's talks with "senior" Kerry campaign officials include discussions of the now discredited documents? Was the launch of the Democrat National Committee's Operation Fortunate Son designed with knowledge of the faked forged memos? Terry McAuliffe said yesterday that no one at the DNC or Kerry campaign, "had anything to do with the preparations of the documents," but what about the distribution or dissemination?
"In an effort to regain the trust of the American people CBS should not only investigate the process that led to the use of these documents but they should identify immediately those engaged in possible criminal activity who attempted to use a news organization to affect the outcome of a Presidential election in its closing days."
END
Some of the questioned raised in the RNC statement have been somewhat answered.
Bill Burkett has said that he contacted officials at the Kerry campaign including Max Cleland.
Other stories have shown that staffers at the DNC and the Kerry campaign saw the documents, but had "concerns" about the authenticity. Probably the only people who believed the documents were true were Bush-basher Mary Mapes, producer of the 60 Minutes story, and Dan Rather.
It is likely, based on recent statements by Burkett, that the Kerry campaign passed the documents onto CBS or told Burkett which news organization would be most friendly to the false allegations.
As noted earlier, CBS' credibility has been damaged. Dan Rather's credibility has been further damaged. It is unlikely to regain any hint of "fair" reporting as long as Mary Mapes is a producer AND Dan Rather is managing editor and anchor.
CBS needs to make some serious changes to bolster sagging ratings and advertising revenue. With Dan Rather "in charge" it will be a very tough road.
G O P.com :: RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie Statement on CBS:
Teresa Speaks
Teresa Heinz Kerry is speaking again.
You remember that she told a Pittsburgh reporter to "shove it," and recently she told supporters at a Kerry rally that anyone who did not support her husband's health care plan was an "idiot."
Now the self-termed African-American has more to say. This time in an interview with a Pittsburgh anchorwoman, Ms Kerry called her critics "scumbags."
Well, Ms Kerry, if that is true, I am proud to be an "idiot" and a "scumbag."
More in The New Yorker: Fact
You remember that she told a Pittsburgh reporter to "shove it," and recently she told supporters at a Kerry rally that anyone who did not support her husband's health care plan was an "idiot."
Now the self-termed African-American has more to say. This time in an interview with a Pittsburgh anchorwoman, Ms Kerry called her critics "scumbags."
Well, Ms Kerry, if that is true, I am proud to be an "idiot" and a "scumbag."
More in The New Yorker: Fact
Rather Statement
Mon Sep 20 2004 11:58:02 ET
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:
Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question "and their source" vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where "if I knew then what I know now" I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully. "
Well, it's a statement in part. CBS has not been known for reporting "fairly and truthfully" for many years. Dan Rather has become a caricature of himself.
This incident is an example of "ax grinding" by a producer, Mary Mapes, and failing to acknowledge a mistake before credibility is ruined.
CBS' credibility as a news gathering organization will be suspect for many years. At least, until 2006 when Rather's contract is up.
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:
Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question "and their source" vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where "if I knew then what I know now" I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully. "
Well, it's a statement in part. CBS has not been known for reporting "fairly and truthfully" for many years. Dan Rather has become a caricature of himself.
This incident is an example of "ax grinding" by a producer, Mary Mapes, and failing to acknowledge a mistake before credibility is ruined.
CBS' credibility as a news gathering organization will be suspect for many years. At least, until 2006 when Rather's contract is up.
From the Federalist Patriot
The Federalist Patriot is an e-newsletter from the Federalist magazine. The Federalist is a conservative publication based in part on the ideals and principles of the Federalist Papers.
The newsletter presents a variety of views based each week on a foundation.
This week there were these interesting items.
DEMO-gogue campaign quotes...
Speaking Thursday with radio talk show host Don Imus, John Kerry muddied the waters more than even we thought possible, arguing that he now sees no reason the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq, but stands by his Senate vote that authorized the war. "Not under the current circumstances, no, there are none that I see," said Kerry when asked about justification for the war. "I voted based on weapons of mass destruction. The president distorted that, and I've said that." (Did the UN, EU, British, French, and German intelligence and virtually every nation of the globe also "distort" that?) Then, flip-flopping almost in the same breath, Kerry added that it was appropriate to threaten Saddam to comply with UNSC resolutions and weapons inspection demands, and that he was "prepared to use the force."
"I think it was the right vote based on what Saddam Hussein had done, and I think it was the right thing to do to hold him accountable," Kerry said. "[My position] can't be clearer."
Really? Don Imus, a self-described Kerry supporter, must have thought otherwise. When Kerry hung up from the interview, Imus told his audience, "I asked him a number of questions about Iraq, and I can't tell you what he said."
The JFK Flip-Flop of the Week...
Flip: "We should increase funding [for the war in Iraq] by whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win." --John F. Kerry, 31 August 2003
Flop: "$200 billion [for Iraq] that we're not investing in education and health care, and job creation here at home. ... That's the wrong choice." --JFK, 8 September 2004
For more go to www.federalist.com
The newsletter presents a variety of views based each week on a foundation.
This week there were these interesting items.
DEMO-gogue campaign quotes...
Speaking Thursday with radio talk show host Don Imus, John Kerry muddied the waters more than even we thought possible, arguing that he now sees no reason the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq, but stands by his Senate vote that authorized the war. "Not under the current circumstances, no, there are none that I see," said Kerry when asked about justification for the war. "I voted based on weapons of mass destruction. The president distorted that, and I've said that." (Did the UN, EU, British, French, and German intelligence and virtually every nation of the globe also "distort" that?) Then, flip-flopping almost in the same breath, Kerry added that it was appropriate to threaten Saddam to comply with UNSC resolutions and weapons inspection demands, and that he was "prepared to use the force."
"I think it was the right vote based on what Saddam Hussein had done, and I think it was the right thing to do to hold him accountable," Kerry said. "[My position] can't be clearer."
Really? Don Imus, a self-described Kerry supporter, must have thought otherwise. When Kerry hung up from the interview, Imus told his audience, "I asked him a number of questions about Iraq, and I can't tell you what he said."
The JFK Flip-Flop of the Week...
Flip: "We should increase funding [for the war in Iraq] by whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win." --John F. Kerry, 31 August 2003
Flop: "$200 billion [for Iraq] that we're not investing in education and health care, and job creation here at home. ... That's the wrong choice." --JFK, 8 September 2004
For more go to www.federalist.com
Weekend Thoughts
Other than stories on the aftermath of hurricane Ivan, it was a slow news weekend.
There were a couple of items that did pique my interest.
+NBC's Meet the Press began its Senate Debates series on Sunday. The first debate was between Sen. Tom Daschle and his opponent former South Dakota Congressman, John Thune. Other than Daschle calling Thune a liar for nych of the debate, there was one interesting comment mad by Daschle.
While arguing over drought relief for South Dakota ranchers, Thune mentioned that he did sponsor a bill for an additional $1 billion in emergency relief. Daschle replied in a sarcastic tone, "they will take anything."
Moderator Tim Russert let this pass and went on to give Daschle a softball questions while continuing to hammer Thune on nonsense. Just your typical Meet the Press.
+On the campaign trail, Sen. John Edwards seems to want things both ways. Of course, these contradict one another.
In one speech, Edwards said that the President's calling up of National Guard and Reserve units is a "hidden" draft. Edwards also said that there will be a big call up after the November election as a "November surprise." Well, Senator, according to Pentagon sources, there have been plans to call up additional Guard and Reserve troops for many months as part of a normal rotation of forces. Nothing new and not a surprise.
In another speech, Edwards says that we are going to "find Al Qaida" and "crush" them. Well, Senator without additional troops to replace those on the front line it will not be possible.
You cannot have it both ways Senator.
There were a couple of items that did pique my interest.
+NBC's Meet the Press began its Senate Debates series on Sunday. The first debate was between Sen. Tom Daschle and his opponent former South Dakota Congressman, John Thune. Other than Daschle calling Thune a liar for nych of the debate, there was one interesting comment mad by Daschle.
While arguing over drought relief for South Dakota ranchers, Thune mentioned that he did sponsor a bill for an additional $1 billion in emergency relief. Daschle replied in a sarcastic tone, "they will take anything."
Moderator Tim Russert let this pass and went on to give Daschle a softball questions while continuing to hammer Thune on nonsense. Just your typical Meet the Press.
+On the campaign trail, Sen. John Edwards seems to want things both ways. Of course, these contradict one another.
In one speech, Edwards said that the President's calling up of National Guard and Reserve units is a "hidden" draft. Edwards also said that there will be a big call up after the November election as a "November surprise." Well, Senator, according to Pentagon sources, there have been plans to call up additional Guard and Reserve troops for many months as part of a normal rotation of forces. Nothing new and not a surprise.
In another speech, Edwards says that we are going to "find Al Qaida" and "crush" them. Well, Senator without additional troops to replace those on the front line it will not be possible.
You cannot have it both ways Senator.
Saturday, September 18, 2004
Fallout From Rathergate
The father of the CBS producer responsible for the story on 60 Minutes with the now discredited documents is ashamed of his daughter.
Don Mapes, 76, was a recent guest on a radio talk show hosted by John Carlson on KVI in Seattle.
He said, 'I'm really ashamed of what my daughter has become. She's a typical liberal. She went into journalism with an ax to grind, and that was to promote radical feminism.'
He confessed to being disappointed in his daughter's role in the controversy. He said, 'When I heard about 60 Minutes, I suspected she would be the producer of the show.'
In an interview with Talon News, Don Mapes said his suspicion was because that he believed, 'Dan Rather and she have been working on this ever since Bush was elected.'
In commenting on the Wednesday's 60 Minutes show, he said, 'It was a farce, it was fraud. I'm sorry as a father that my daughter was the producer of it.'"
Since Dan Rather contract extends until 2006 it is likely that Mapes will be the sacrificial lamb in this case. Of course, she should be since her actions reflect a strong liberal bias and a failure to follow even minimal journalistic standards. She will be mentioned in the same sentence as Jayson Blair.
Her future in journalism is over.
Full article -->The Weekly Online!:
Don Mapes, 76, was a recent guest on a radio talk show hosted by John Carlson on KVI in Seattle.
He said, 'I'm really ashamed of what my daughter has become. She's a typical liberal. She went into journalism with an ax to grind, and that was to promote radical feminism.'
He confessed to being disappointed in his daughter's role in the controversy. He said, 'When I heard about 60 Minutes, I suspected she would be the producer of the show.'
In an interview with Talon News, Don Mapes said his suspicion was because that he believed, 'Dan Rather and she have been working on this ever since Bush was elected.'
In commenting on the Wednesday's 60 Minutes show, he said, 'It was a farce, it was fraud. I'm sorry as a father that my daughter was the producer of it.'"
Since Dan Rather contract extends until 2006 it is likely that Mapes will be the sacrificial lamb in this case. Of course, she should be since her actions reflect a strong liberal bias and a failure to follow even minimal journalistic standards. She will be mentioned in the same sentence as Jayson Blair.
Her future in journalism is over.
Full article -->The Weekly Online!:
Col. Staudt denies Bush got special treatment
Retired Colonel Walter Staudt has finally spoken. Staudt is the former commander of the Texas Air National Guard who according to CBS was the officer who requested the George Bush's evaluations be "sugar coated."
Staudt has told ABC News that Bush was was a highly qualified officer and passed all the necessary tests.
CBS claims that although the memo used on 60 Minutes was written 18 months after Col. Staudt retired, he retained a "sphere of influence" over the Guard.
Staudt tells ABC News that after his retirement from the Texas Guard he had no further involvement. "There was no reason to," according to Staudt.
Full story -->WorldNetDaily: Col. Staudt denies Bush got special treatment
Staudt has told ABC News that Bush was was a highly qualified officer and passed all the necessary tests.
CBS claims that although the memo used on 60 Minutes was written 18 months after Col. Staudt retired, he retained a "sphere of influence" over the Guard.
Staudt tells ABC News that after his retirement from the Texas Guard he had no further involvement. "There was no reason to," according to Staudt.
Full story -->WorldNetDaily: Col. Staudt denies Bush got special treatment
Friday, September 17, 2004
Martha Ready, Prisons Aren't
Although Martha Stewart is ready to face her prison sentence, the prisons she requested are not.
Both Federal prisons on Stewart's list, Danbury, CT and Coleman, FL, are at full capacity and unavailable. A third prison in West Virginia is not suitable for Stewart due to its lack of rail or air transportation.
I guess the bigger question is, "Should convicted felons be able to select the prison of their choice?" I say no.
Newsday.com - Stewart on Waiting List?
Both Federal prisons on Stewart's list, Danbury, CT and Coleman, FL, are at full capacity and unavailable. A third prison in West Virginia is not suitable for Stewart due to its lack of rail or air transportation.
I guess the bigger question is, "Should convicted felons be able to select the prison of their choice?" I say no.
Newsday.com - Stewart on Waiting List?
WorldNetDaily: Swift vet ad: Kerry 'Dazed and Confused'
A new ad from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth will be hitting the air in several battleground states.
While keeping with the same theme, you cannot trust John Kerry, the new ad contrasts his statement in 1971 and earlier this year about throwing away his medals.
More -->WorldNetDaily: Swift vet ad: Kerry 'Dazed and Confused'
While keeping with the same theme, you cannot trust John Kerry, the new ad contrasts his statement in 1971 and earlier this year about throwing away his medals.
More -->WorldNetDaily: Swift vet ad: Kerry 'Dazed and Confused'
It's 'Rather' a Problem
Dan Rather and his bosses at CBS News are in a controversy that they created. Within hours of the airing of the story on 60 Minutes, experts began to look closely at the documents. Now there are few, if any, document experts who do not believe that the documents shown by CBS News are forgeries.
One expert said that he is unable to authenticate the signature or the document, but he can tell that the document is a fake or a forgery. Experts contacted by CBS News before the airing of the story had “concerns” from the beginning about the documents. Concerns that CBS News, 60 Minutes, and, especially, Dan Rather ignored. Why were these concerns and warnings ignored?
They were ignored primarily because of arrogance. Arrogance that the viewers would not care. Arrogance that people will believe anything Dan Rather says because he is Dan Rather. That the viewers of 60 Minutes and Dan Rather are as partisan and liberal as Rather. If that were true, the backlash would not have happened. Dan Rather and CBS would not be the target of a possible Congressional investigation.
CBS and Dan Rather have decided to stonewall the issue and refuse to give “direct answers” to questions about or the identity of the source. At the same time Rather is “demanding” answers from President Bush about his National Guard service and dismissing the comments of the First Lady. Dismissing Laura Bush’s comment is dangerous ground for Rather. The President and his staff will, no doubt, find some way to give Rather the same type of treatment. It will be unlikely if Rather or any reporter from CBS receives an exclusive interview from anyone in the Bush Administration for a long time.
Although it has been treated as a sidebar, a larger issue may be where the documents came from. Rather claims they came from a “reliable” and “impeccable” source. Who in Dan Rather’s mind is such a source? Is it a Texas Democrat who raises thousands of dollars for the Kerry campaign? Could be. Here is a list, based on various reports, of possible sources for the documents.
*The Democratic National Committee. An unnamed staffer at the DNC says that he/she had doubts about the documents, but sent them to the Kerry campaign.
*The Kerry campaign. Staffers at the Kerry campaign say there were concerns about the documents. Speculation is that the campaign sent the documents to CBS.
*Karl Rove. This is the DNC’s favorite source. Karl Rove did it to embarrass the Kerry campaign and the DNC. Do they need any more help?
*Dan Rather. Why not? He refuses to identify the source. Is it possible that CBS staffers forged the documents? I wonder if CBS News uses Microsoft Word.
These are the most logical sources, but until CBS requires Dan Rather to release the sources it can only be speculation.
What if CBS finds out that the documents are truly forged? What will their response be?
Will Dan Rather be suspended, fired, or forced to retire? No. Why? He knows where many of the skeletons are buried and has for many years. Some of you may remember the controversy during the Nixon presidency. Rather, much younger and more arrogant then, insulted the president during a live press conference. After the press conference, the White House went ballistic, but Rather kept his job. Well, he was placed on the Enemies List at the White House.
Will anyone lose their job at CBS. Probably, but it will be a low level producer and not Susan Mapes the producer of the story.
Will CBS change the way it does news? No.
Will CBS ever regain its credibility? Only partially. CBS News has been losing credibility for years. It has an obvious liberal bias and has done nothing over the years to correct it or run from it. Former CBS correspondent Bernard Goldberg was a victim of the bias after questioning several stories on the CBS Evening News. He was not fired, but was in a sort of limbo. His stories were ignored by CBS producers and managing editor, Dan Rather. Eventually, Goldberg left CBS News and began writing books about the liberal-bias in the media.
If CBS makes any further statements other than Rather blathering night after night that the documents are genuine, it will be interesting to see what happens.
One expert said that he is unable to authenticate the signature or the document, but he can tell that the document is a fake or a forgery. Experts contacted by CBS News before the airing of the story had “concerns” from the beginning about the documents. Concerns that CBS News, 60 Minutes, and, especially, Dan Rather ignored. Why were these concerns and warnings ignored?
They were ignored primarily because of arrogance. Arrogance that the viewers would not care. Arrogance that people will believe anything Dan Rather says because he is Dan Rather. That the viewers of 60 Minutes and Dan Rather are as partisan and liberal as Rather. If that were true, the backlash would not have happened. Dan Rather and CBS would not be the target of a possible Congressional investigation.
CBS and Dan Rather have decided to stonewall the issue and refuse to give “direct answers” to questions about or the identity of the source. At the same time Rather is “demanding” answers from President Bush about his National Guard service and dismissing the comments of the First Lady. Dismissing Laura Bush’s comment is dangerous ground for Rather. The President and his staff will, no doubt, find some way to give Rather the same type of treatment. It will be unlikely if Rather or any reporter from CBS receives an exclusive interview from anyone in the Bush Administration for a long time.
Although it has been treated as a sidebar, a larger issue may be where the documents came from. Rather claims they came from a “reliable” and “impeccable” source. Who in Dan Rather’s mind is such a source? Is it a Texas Democrat who raises thousands of dollars for the Kerry campaign? Could be. Here is a list, based on various reports, of possible sources for the documents.
*The Democratic National Committee. An unnamed staffer at the DNC says that he/she had doubts about the documents, but sent them to the Kerry campaign.
*The Kerry campaign. Staffers at the Kerry campaign say there were concerns about the documents. Speculation is that the campaign sent the documents to CBS.
*Karl Rove. This is the DNC’s favorite source. Karl Rove did it to embarrass the Kerry campaign and the DNC. Do they need any more help?
*Dan Rather. Why not? He refuses to identify the source. Is it possible that CBS staffers forged the documents? I wonder if CBS News uses Microsoft Word.
These are the most logical sources, but until CBS requires Dan Rather to release the sources it can only be speculation.
What if CBS finds out that the documents are truly forged? What will their response be?
Will Dan Rather be suspended, fired, or forced to retire? No. Why? He knows where many of the skeletons are buried and has for many years. Some of you may remember the controversy during the Nixon presidency. Rather, much younger and more arrogant then, insulted the president during a live press conference. After the press conference, the White House went ballistic, but Rather kept his job. Well, he was placed on the Enemies List at the White House.
Will anyone lose their job at CBS. Probably, but it will be a low level producer and not Susan Mapes the producer of the story.
Will CBS change the way it does news? No.
Will CBS ever regain its credibility? Only partially. CBS News has been losing credibility for years. It has an obvious liberal bias and has done nothing over the years to correct it or run from it. Former CBS correspondent Bernard Goldberg was a victim of the bias after questioning several stories on the CBS Evening News. He was not fired, but was in a sort of limbo. His stories were ignored by CBS producers and managing editor, Dan Rather. Eventually, Goldberg left CBS News and began writing books about the liberal-bias in the media.
If CBS makes any further statements other than Rather blathering night after night that the documents are genuine, it will be interesting to see what happens.
C-BS by Ann Coulter
Here is this week's column from Ann Coulter.
There is, however, one area of disagreement with the column. In the column Ms Coulter says that Dan Rather has nothing to do with the content of his newscast. That is not the case.
Rather is listed as the managing editor for the newscast and takes this part of his job seriously. Seriously enough to change the focus of stories, ignore stories, and eliminate stories from reporters he dislikes.
Case is point. During the disappearance of intern Chandra Levy, Rather decided that this story, involving a US Congressmen, was not important enough to report. After the discovery of Ms Levy's body, Rather decided to give the story a brief mention on the CBS Evening News.
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: C-BS by Ann Coulter
There is, however, one area of disagreement with the column. In the column Ms Coulter says that Dan Rather has nothing to do with the content of his newscast. That is not the case.
Rather is listed as the managing editor for the newscast and takes this part of his job seriously. Seriously enough to change the focus of stories, ignore stories, and eliminate stories from reporters he dislikes.
Case is point. During the disappearance of intern Chandra Levy, Rather decided that this story, involving a US Congressmen, was not important enough to report. After the discovery of Ms Levy's body, Rather decided to give the story a brief mention on the CBS Evening News.
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: C-BS by Ann Coulter
Items From the Kerry Spot on National Review Online
TOO GOOD A JOKE TO NOT PASS ALONG
From the blogger Protein Wisdom:
Dan Rather: “A corn beef sandwich, please. On rye.”
deli counter guy: “One corn beef sandwich on rye. Anything else?”
Dan Rather: “Well I’m not going to apologize, if that’s what you’re driving at.”
There's more humor at that site, too.
HAMITON JORDAN: BUSH BOUNCE 'IS BEGINNING TO LOOK LIKE A HURRICANE IVAN SURGE'
Al Hunt, writing in the Wall Street Journal:
John Kerry remained on the defensive this week, and was unable to make up much needed ground against President Bush, according to two men who have run presidential campaigns in the past.
"The Bush bounce is beginning to look like a Hurricane Ivan surge," cracked Hamilton Jordan, who directed Jimmy Carter's presidential campaigns. With the contest still looking "more like a referendum on Kerry," he adds that the "relatively small number of undecideds" are moving "disproportionately in Bush's direction."
What advice would he give to the Democratic candidate? "He needs to find a strong and simple message and make it his own … focused on the deteriorating situation in Iraq and on the U.S. economy. …John Kerry needs to look deep inside himself, decide what he believes and thinks, cast caution to the wind and start saying it with some passion and emotion."
But John Sears, who ran Ronald Reagan's 1976 campaign, believes the Democratic nominee has "very limited" room on Iraq: "You get up and start criticizing the war and that may help Bush … Iraq ultimately may hurt [the president], but if it becomes a political issue people usually rally behind the president." Thus, he believes Sen. Kerry has "no choice" but to focus on the economy and domestic issues.
The president's campaign, however, better be careful, Mr. Sears cautions, "This week he didn't do much more than stall the clock. He's got to keep giving people reasons to vote for him. Now may not be quite the time, but soon he has to be pro-active."
Mr. Jordan believes that the president, while "hitting on all cylinders" now, is "still vulnerable on the true issues facing the country in this election. Bush only looks good right now in contrast to Kerry."
Poll News
GALLUP
AP: A Gallup poll being released Friday has Bush up 54-40 in a three-way matchup, with Ralph Nader at 3 percent.
WEIRDNESS IN THE PEW POLL
Far be it from me to tell the Pew Research Center how to conduct their polls. But the latest one seems, uh... weird.
The biggest point is that it conducted its latest poll in "two waves." The post-9/11 wave had a huge bump for Kerry.
In the first wave, Bush was up, 52 to 40. Second wave, it's tied, 46 to 46.
In the first wave, Bush was winning voters under 30 years old, 55 percent to 35 percent.
Second wave? Bush trails, 41 to 55, a 20 point shift.
First wave, Bush leads among seniors, 53 to 37. Second wave Bush trails 37 to 50.
Does this mean the poll is as reliable as a memo from CBS? No. The pollsters explain:
As more time has passed since the Aug. 30-Sept.2 Republican convention, Kerry's unfavorable ratings have receded somewhat. And while Kerry no longer holds the big advantage he once had on most issues, his standing relative to Bush has rebounded slightly on the economy.
The second wave of polling also finds less acceptance of Republican criticism of the Democratic candidate. Fewer voters agree with the statement "John Kerry changes his mind too much." Fewer think the chances of terrorism would increase if Kerry is elected. In addition, a substantial majority of voters (66%) believe Vice President Cheney went too far when he suggested recently that risk of terrorism would increase if voters "make the wrong choice." That opinion remained steady through the polling period.
Whether all this would add up to a double-digit swing in a matter of days, though... I'm still not sure.
From the blogger Protein Wisdom:
Dan Rather: “A corn beef sandwich, please. On rye.”
deli counter guy: “One corn beef sandwich on rye. Anything else?”
Dan Rather: “Well I’m not going to apologize, if that’s what you’re driving at.”
There's more humor at that site, too.
HAMITON JORDAN: BUSH BOUNCE 'IS BEGINNING TO LOOK LIKE A HURRICANE IVAN SURGE'
Al Hunt, writing in the Wall Street Journal:
John Kerry remained on the defensive this week, and was unable to make up much needed ground against President Bush, according to two men who have run presidential campaigns in the past.
"The Bush bounce is beginning to look like a Hurricane Ivan surge," cracked Hamilton Jordan, who directed Jimmy Carter's presidential campaigns. With the contest still looking "more like a referendum on Kerry," he adds that the "relatively small number of undecideds" are moving "disproportionately in Bush's direction."
What advice would he give to the Democratic candidate? "He needs to find a strong and simple message and make it his own … focused on the deteriorating situation in Iraq and on the U.S. economy. …John Kerry needs to look deep inside himself, decide what he believes and thinks, cast caution to the wind and start saying it with some passion and emotion."
But John Sears, who ran Ronald Reagan's 1976 campaign, believes the Democratic nominee has "very limited" room on Iraq: "You get up and start criticizing the war and that may help Bush … Iraq ultimately may hurt [the president], but if it becomes a political issue people usually rally behind the president." Thus, he believes Sen. Kerry has "no choice" but to focus on the economy and domestic issues.
The president's campaign, however, better be careful, Mr. Sears cautions, "This week he didn't do much more than stall the clock. He's got to keep giving people reasons to vote for him. Now may not be quite the time, but soon he has to be pro-active."
Mr. Jordan believes that the president, while "hitting on all cylinders" now, is "still vulnerable on the true issues facing the country in this election. Bush only looks good right now in contrast to Kerry."
Poll News
GALLUP
AP: A Gallup poll being released Friday has Bush up 54-40 in a three-way matchup, with Ralph Nader at 3 percent.
WEIRDNESS IN THE PEW POLL
Far be it from me to tell the Pew Research Center how to conduct their polls. But the latest one seems, uh... weird.
The biggest point is that it conducted its latest poll in "two waves." The post-9/11 wave had a huge bump for Kerry.
In the first wave, Bush was up, 52 to 40. Second wave, it's tied, 46 to 46.
In the first wave, Bush was winning voters under 30 years old, 55 percent to 35 percent.
Second wave? Bush trails, 41 to 55, a 20 point shift.
First wave, Bush leads among seniors, 53 to 37. Second wave Bush trails 37 to 50.
Does this mean the poll is as reliable as a memo from CBS? No. The pollsters explain:
As more time has passed since the Aug. 30-Sept.2 Republican convention, Kerry's unfavorable ratings have receded somewhat. And while Kerry no longer holds the big advantage he once had on most issues, his standing relative to Bush has rebounded slightly on the economy.
The second wave of polling also finds less acceptance of Republican criticism of the Democratic candidate. Fewer voters agree with the statement "John Kerry changes his mind too much." Fewer think the chances of terrorism would increase if Kerry is elected. In addition, a substantial majority of voters (66%) believe Vice President Cheney went too far when he suggested recently that risk of terrorism would increase if voters "make the wrong choice." That opinion remained steady through the polling period.
Whether all this would add up to a double-digit swing in a matter of days, though... I'm still not sure.
Tidbits - 9/17/04
Here are some interesting items.
+It appears that John Kerry may not have been forthright in saying that "all" his Navy records were on the campaign website.
The Navy says that statement is inaccurate. According to an e-mail from Navy officials about 30 documents were note release because Senator Kerry did not file the proper form for their release.
The email from the Navy was in response to a Freedom of Information request by the group Judicial Watch.
Full article -->Navy Contradicts Kerry on Release of Military Records -- 09/16/2004
+"Stick to the facts," was the essence of a response from the White House concerning the documents used by CBS anchor Dan Rather.
White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, slammed the CBS reporter for relying on "feelings" of a Bush critic and the campaign did not need his advice.
White House rips Rather for report, his advice - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - September 17, 2004
+Kerry-Edwards supporters are so desperate that they tore up a Bush-Cheney poster being held by a three year-old at a Kerry-Edwards rally in Huntington, WV.
I guess free speech only applies to the Kerry-Edwards team and 527s.
Picture and story here
More later
+It appears that John Kerry may not have been forthright in saying that "all" his Navy records were on the campaign website.
The Navy says that statement is inaccurate. According to an e-mail from Navy officials about 30 documents were note release because Senator Kerry did not file the proper form for their release.
The email from the Navy was in response to a Freedom of Information request by the group Judicial Watch.
Full article -->Navy Contradicts Kerry on Release of Military Records -- 09/16/2004
+"Stick to the facts," was the essence of a response from the White House concerning the documents used by CBS anchor Dan Rather.
White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, slammed the CBS reporter for relying on "feelings" of a Bush critic and the campaign did not need his advice.
White House rips Rather for report, his advice - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - September 17, 2004
+Kerry-Edwards supporters are so desperate that they tore up a Bush-Cheney poster being held by a three year-old at a Kerry-Edwards rally in Huntington, WV.
I guess free speech only applies to the Kerry-Edwards team and 527s.
Picture and story here
More later
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Tidbits - 9/15/04
The controversy rages and CBS and Dan Rather continue to stonewall.
Rather insists the documents used last Wednesday on 60 Minutes II are authentic, but neither Rather nor CBS will reveal the source of the documents.
Forgery -- 09/15/2004
+There will be one less Democratic Senator on the floor of the Senate for the next 7 weeks. The Senior Senator from Massachusetts, Edward "Ted" Kennedy, has announced that he will be hitting the campaign trail for John Kerry.
An aide for the senator said that he will be more active and travel more than he did for Gore in 2000. Kennedy's rhetoric will include daily rebukes of the President on every issue from health care to Iraq.
It is unlikely that Kennedy will be able to help the declining Kerry campaign with rhetoric similar to the Bush bashing speech given at the Democratic National Convention.
Yahoo! News - Kennedy to Hit Campaign Trail for Kerry
+A longtime Democratic operative Tony Coelho criticized the Kerry campaign, noting that the campaign is in chaos.
According to Coelho the hiring of former Clinton aids and associates is making the situation worse not better. As noted on this site earlier in the week, the addition of the Clinton operatives has created a dual culture and possible civil war within the campaign.
Coelho notes, "There is no one in charge."
More -->CBS News | Top Dem Rips Kerry Campaign | September 15, 2004�00:27:51
More later.
Rather insists the documents used last Wednesday on 60 Minutes II are authentic, but neither Rather nor CBS will reveal the source of the documents.
Forgery -- 09/15/2004
+There will be one less Democratic Senator on the floor of the Senate for the next 7 weeks. The Senior Senator from Massachusetts, Edward "Ted" Kennedy, has announced that he will be hitting the campaign trail for John Kerry.
An aide for the senator said that he will be more active and travel more than he did for Gore in 2000. Kennedy's rhetoric will include daily rebukes of the President on every issue from health care to Iraq.
It is unlikely that Kennedy will be able to help the declining Kerry campaign with rhetoric similar to the Bush bashing speech given at the Democratic National Convention.
Yahoo! News - Kennedy to Hit Campaign Trail for Kerry
+A longtime Democratic operative Tony Coelho criticized the Kerry campaign, noting that the campaign is in chaos.
According to Coelho the hiring of former Clinton aids and associates is making the situation worse not better. As noted on this site earlier in the week, the addition of the Clinton operatives has created a dual culture and possible civil war within the campaign.
Coelho notes, "There is no one in charge."
More -->CBS News | Top Dem Rips Kerry Campaign | September 15, 2004�00:27:51
More later.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Kerry Silver Star report backs critics
The official after action report, written by LTjg John Kerry, supports critcis of the awarding of the Silver Star.
In his own words Kerry reports that he chased a wounded VC and shot him.
Full story -->WorldNetDaily: Kerry Silver Star report backs critics
In his own words Kerry reports that he chased a wounded VC and shot him.
Full story -->WorldNetDaily: Kerry Silver Star report backs critics
Items From the Kerry SPot From National Review Online
INTERESTING SUSPECTS OF WHO GAVE CBS THE MEMOS
I have no idea if the guys at CrushKerry.com are right, but they have an anonymous Democratic source who offers an intriguing theory. Go to the website, and learn why they think the memos were given to CBS... by MoveOn.org.
The idea that the Kerry camp gave the memos to CBS doesn't quite feel right. One, the documents are a ridiculously amateurish forgery, and one would think the Kerry campaign, for all of their problems, could at least be competent in its dirty tricks. Two, if one were a nefarious Kerry or DNC operative, wouldn’t one want a memo that was a little more… useful? Something like a memo from Colin Powell warning Bush about all the potential problems in Iraq after Saddam’s regime fell. A memo from someone in the Pentagon warning Bush and Cheney about the problems of Abu Ghraib. A memo from a CIA study group concluding Iraq didn’t have weapons of mass destruction, dating from the middle of 2003. (Plus, a forger trying to create one of those documents wouldn’t have to worry about accurately recreating 1972-era fonts.)
All of those would have proven exponentially more useful to the Kerry campaign than rehashing the National Guard stuff, which is small and old potatoes.
But MoveOn.org… they seem impulsive enough to do something like that. Their members obviously hate Bush with a passion, and their fiery rage seems powerful enough to blind them to the ramifications of a stunt like this and the consequences of it backfiring. Their members have been clear that their goal is to beat Bush, not necessarily to build up Kerry. And their members were fired up by Michael Moore’s “Bush is a deserter” claim during the Democratic primaries.
Eh, right now, this is just speculation. The most likely source for the documents would be some Texas-area Bush critic who could semi-plausibly claim to be in the right place at the right time to get these documents. Someone like Bob Burkett, who Newsweek describes as “a disgruntled former Guard officer who lives in Baird, Texas, who says he was present at Guard headquarters in Austin in 1997, when a top aide to the then Governor Bush ordered records sanitized to protect the Boss. Other Guard officials disputed Burkett's account, and the Bush aide involved, Joe Allbaugh, called it "absolute garbage." Burkett may have a motive to make trouble for the powers that be. In 1998, he grew gravely ill on a Guard mission to Panama, causing him to be hospitalized, and he suffered two nervous breakdowns. He unsuccessfully sued for medical expenses.”
On a related note, AllahPundit makes a compelling case that the author of this memo surfs anti-Bush websites. Why? Well, the memo includes the wrong acronym, “OETR”. People familiar with military terminology suggest that the acronym the author of the memo meant to use was OER — an abbreviation for “Officer Effectiveness Report.” An anti-Bush website called the “AWOL Project” lists a bunch of released documents under the title, “The OETR Scam.”
Maybe it’s a coincidence.
THIS STORY GETS BETTER AND BETTER
From The New York Post:
The expert chosen by CBS to check Dan Rather's disputed National Guard documents got his start as a graphologist analyzing "Spirituality in Handwriting" and lacks recognized document training, The Post has learned.
Analyst Marcel Matley lists "Spirituality in Handwriting" and "Female/Male Traits in Handwriting" on the Web site for a foundation he serves as librarian. They were privately printed, but another analyst provided portions to The Post.
In "Spirituality in Handwriting," Matley assesses a woman's "libidinal energy" based on her handwriting.
Now, we as know, Matley has flipped like a common street hood getting worked over by Sipowicz on NYPD Blue, and is now cooperating with the critics of the report ["1970s-Era Typewriter Vets For Truth?"] , and admitting he couldn't authenticate the memo from a photocopy.
However, finding out that CBS originally thought this guy was going to save them and end the controversy reveals a great deal about what they think of their viewers, and their critics.
THE LATEST FROM WITHIN CBS
I have recently talked with an individual who claims to be familiar with the internal discussions at CBS News. This source built some credibility when he/she accurately stated that Drudge’s report of an internal investigation was wrong (Rather denied Drudge‘s report a few hours later), and this person also accurately predicted the network’s full-throated defense of the story on Friday evening, when some were wondering if the network would backtrack.
This individual told the Kerry Spot late Monday night that some of CBS’ news talent who were campaigning for the anchor desk when Rather retires, are more than a little pleased with the recent turn of events. These individuals, who, admittedly, have a great personal stake in getting Rather out the door, are contending in internal discussions that the blame belongs with Rather, not with any lower-ranking producer.
This individual also suggests that Don Hewitt, creator of 60 Minutes and who initially opposed the idea of establishing ‘60 Minutes II,’ is as livid as one would imagine. The pressure within CBS is intense and building steadily, the source said.
In another assessment of morale at CBS, I have also heard from one CBS employee, who works outside the newsroom, who has lamented that the memo controversy has left him/her “horribly disappointed, because I truly want to believe we're better than that.” (These sources have asked to not be identified, because they would like to keep their jobs.)
I also spent Monday touching base with various reporters and editors at mainstream newspapers and magazines in Washington, and not one would defend CBS’s action in this case. One editor at a publication that covers Capitol Hill said, “Anytime a major media outlet leaps to a conclusion on what appears to be highly questionable evidence, we all pay a price in terms of lessened credibility. Bad journalism is like bad anything — lawyers, doctors or apples. One bad one can taint the whole group.”
UPDATE: Here's a report in the New York Times that appears to back up my source's description of tension at CBS. Of course, this presumes the Times reporter is better than Jayson Blair.
Several CBS correspondents said in interviews that such developments were making them increasingly nervous.
One network correspondent said, "I've talked to colleagues who would love to see more of a defense."
This person described the state of the staff as "deep concern, I'd say not panic - we all want it to be right." This person, echoing others, said that Mr. Rather's resoluteness in addressing the charges on the air was allaying some of the concern. "Dan really put himself on the line and I can't imagine him knowingly defending something he knew not to be the case."
A longtime correspondent said flatly, "I'm distressed."
Mike Wallace, the longtime "60 Minutes" correspondent, said after hearing about new challenges to the validity of the documents on Sunday, "I'm confused by some of what I've heard today." But of his colleagues working on the report, he said: "You're dealing with genuine professionals. The last thing in the world that any of these people would want is to phony something."
My guess is that now that the Post has dismembered the CBS defense in this morning's edition, and raised a new set of hard questions, internal grumbling and finger-pointing at CBS News will intensify in the coming days.
DEVELOPMENT ON KERRY'S NAVY DOCS
I have been informed of this site, reporting that the After Action reports for the incident that resulted in John Kerry's Silver Star from the U.S. Navy Archives and have posted it online. According to the commentary, they say that the after-action report was written by Kerry, and constitutes a key fact supporting the argument of the Swift Boat Vets for Truth.
The commentary is written by Mark Hyman, vice president for corporate relations for Sinclair, the nation’s largest operator of television stations.
Honestly, my first reaction is, one big earth-shattering story based on thirty-some year old documents at a time, folks.
And yes, the font on the After Action reports looks accurate.
READ THE POST, PRONTO
The Washington Post has another huge story on this — too bad it's running on Page A8.
The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.
"There's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them," Marcel Matley said in a telephone interview from San Francisco. The main reason, he said, is that they are "copies" that are "far removed" from the originals.
Matley's comments came amid growing evidence challenging the authenticity of the documents aired Wednesday on CBS's "60 Minutes."...
A detailed comparison by The Washington Post of memos obtained by CBS News with authenticated documents on Bush's National Guard service reveals dozens of inconsistencies, ranging from conflicting military terminology to different word-processing techniques.
The analysis shows that half a dozen Killian memos released earlier by the military were written with a standard typewriter using different formatting techniques from those characteristic of computer-generated documents. CBS's Killian memos bear numerous signs that are more consistent with modern-day word-processing programs, particularly Microsoft Word.
"I am personally 100 percent sure that they are fake," said Joseph M. Newcomer, author of several books on Windows programming, who worked on electronic typesetting techniques in the early 1970s. Newcomer said he had produced virtually exact replicas of the CBS documents using Microsoft Word formatting and the Times New Roman font.
Newcomer drew an analogy with an art expert trying to determine whether a painting of unknown provenance was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci. "If I was looking for a Da Vinci, I would look for characteristic brush strokes," he said. "If I found something that was painted with a modern synthetic brush, I would know that I have a forgery."
Meanwhile, Laura Bush became the first person from the White House to say the documents are likely forgeries. "You know they are probably altered," she told Radio Iowa in Des Moines yesterday. "And they probably are forgeries, and I think that's terrible, really."
UPDATE: More strikingly tough criticism of CBS from the Post:
In its broadcast last night, CBS News produced a new expert, Bill Glennon, an information technology consultant. He said that IBM electric typewriters in use in 1972 could produce superscripts and proportional spacing similar to those used in the disputed documents.
Any argument to the contrary is "an out-and-out lie," Glennon said in a telephone interview. But Glennon said he is not a document expert, could not vouch for the memos' authenticity and only examined them online because CBS did not give him copies when asked to visit the network's offices.
Thomas Phinney, program manager for fonts for the Adobe company in Seattle, which helped to develop the modern Times New Roman font, disputed Glennon's statement to CBS. He said "fairly extensive testing" had convinced him that the fonts and formatting used in the CBS documents could not have been produced by the most sophisticated IBM typewriters in use in 1972, including the Selectric and the Executive. He said the two systems used fonts of different widths.
I have no idea if the guys at CrushKerry.com are right, but they have an anonymous Democratic source who offers an intriguing theory. Go to the website, and learn why they think the memos were given to CBS... by MoveOn.org.
The idea that the Kerry camp gave the memos to CBS doesn't quite feel right. One, the documents are a ridiculously amateurish forgery, and one would think the Kerry campaign, for all of their problems, could at least be competent in its dirty tricks. Two, if one were a nefarious Kerry or DNC operative, wouldn’t one want a memo that was a little more… useful? Something like a memo from Colin Powell warning Bush about all the potential problems in Iraq after Saddam’s regime fell. A memo from someone in the Pentagon warning Bush and Cheney about the problems of Abu Ghraib. A memo from a CIA study group concluding Iraq didn’t have weapons of mass destruction, dating from the middle of 2003. (Plus, a forger trying to create one of those documents wouldn’t have to worry about accurately recreating 1972-era fonts.)
All of those would have proven exponentially more useful to the Kerry campaign than rehashing the National Guard stuff, which is small and old potatoes.
But MoveOn.org… they seem impulsive enough to do something like that. Their members obviously hate Bush with a passion, and their fiery rage seems powerful enough to blind them to the ramifications of a stunt like this and the consequences of it backfiring. Their members have been clear that their goal is to beat Bush, not necessarily to build up Kerry. And their members were fired up by Michael Moore’s “Bush is a deserter” claim during the Democratic primaries.
Eh, right now, this is just speculation. The most likely source for the documents would be some Texas-area Bush critic who could semi-plausibly claim to be in the right place at the right time to get these documents. Someone like Bob Burkett, who Newsweek describes as “a disgruntled former Guard officer who lives in Baird, Texas, who says he was present at Guard headquarters in Austin in 1997, when a top aide to the then Governor Bush ordered records sanitized to protect the Boss. Other Guard officials disputed Burkett's account, and the Bush aide involved, Joe Allbaugh, called it "absolute garbage." Burkett may have a motive to make trouble for the powers that be. In 1998, he grew gravely ill on a Guard mission to Panama, causing him to be hospitalized, and he suffered two nervous breakdowns. He unsuccessfully sued for medical expenses.”
On a related note, AllahPundit makes a compelling case that the author of this memo surfs anti-Bush websites. Why? Well, the memo includes the wrong acronym, “OETR”. People familiar with military terminology suggest that the acronym the author of the memo meant to use was OER — an abbreviation for “Officer Effectiveness Report.” An anti-Bush website called the “AWOL Project” lists a bunch of released documents under the title, “The OETR Scam.”
Maybe it’s a coincidence.
THIS STORY GETS BETTER AND BETTER
From The New York Post:
The expert chosen by CBS to check Dan Rather's disputed National Guard documents got his start as a graphologist analyzing "Spirituality in Handwriting" and lacks recognized document training, The Post has learned.
Analyst Marcel Matley lists "Spirituality in Handwriting" and "Female/Male Traits in Handwriting" on the Web site for a foundation he serves as librarian. They were privately printed, but another analyst provided portions to The Post.
In "Spirituality in Handwriting," Matley assesses a woman's "libidinal energy" based on her handwriting.
Now, we as know, Matley has flipped like a common street hood getting worked over by Sipowicz on NYPD Blue, and is now cooperating with the critics of the report ["1970s-Era Typewriter Vets For Truth?"] , and admitting he couldn't authenticate the memo from a photocopy.
However, finding out that CBS originally thought this guy was going to save them and end the controversy reveals a great deal about what they think of their viewers, and their critics.
THE LATEST FROM WITHIN CBS
I have recently talked with an individual who claims to be familiar with the internal discussions at CBS News. This source built some credibility when he/she accurately stated that Drudge’s report of an internal investigation was wrong (Rather denied Drudge‘s report a few hours later), and this person also accurately predicted the network’s full-throated defense of the story on Friday evening, when some were wondering if the network would backtrack.
This individual told the Kerry Spot late Monday night that some of CBS’ news talent who were campaigning for the anchor desk when Rather retires, are more than a little pleased with the recent turn of events. These individuals, who, admittedly, have a great personal stake in getting Rather out the door, are contending in internal discussions that the blame belongs with Rather, not with any lower-ranking producer.
This individual also suggests that Don Hewitt, creator of 60 Minutes and who initially opposed the idea of establishing ‘60 Minutes II,’ is as livid as one would imagine. The pressure within CBS is intense and building steadily, the source said.
In another assessment of morale at CBS, I have also heard from one CBS employee, who works outside the newsroom, who has lamented that the memo controversy has left him/her “horribly disappointed, because I truly want to believe we're better than that.” (These sources have asked to not be identified, because they would like to keep their jobs.)
I also spent Monday touching base with various reporters and editors at mainstream newspapers and magazines in Washington, and not one would defend CBS’s action in this case. One editor at a publication that covers Capitol Hill said, “Anytime a major media outlet leaps to a conclusion on what appears to be highly questionable evidence, we all pay a price in terms of lessened credibility. Bad journalism is like bad anything — lawyers, doctors or apples. One bad one can taint the whole group.”
UPDATE: Here's a report in the New York Times that appears to back up my source's description of tension at CBS. Of course, this presumes the Times reporter is better than Jayson Blair.
Several CBS correspondents said in interviews that such developments were making them increasingly nervous.
One network correspondent said, "I've talked to colleagues who would love to see more of a defense."
This person described the state of the staff as "deep concern, I'd say not panic - we all want it to be right." This person, echoing others, said that Mr. Rather's resoluteness in addressing the charges on the air was allaying some of the concern. "Dan really put himself on the line and I can't imagine him knowingly defending something he knew not to be the case."
A longtime correspondent said flatly, "I'm distressed."
Mike Wallace, the longtime "60 Minutes" correspondent, said after hearing about new challenges to the validity of the documents on Sunday, "I'm confused by some of what I've heard today." But of his colleagues working on the report, he said: "You're dealing with genuine professionals. The last thing in the world that any of these people would want is to phony something."
My guess is that now that the Post has dismembered the CBS defense in this morning's edition, and raised a new set of hard questions, internal grumbling and finger-pointing at CBS News will intensify in the coming days.
DEVELOPMENT ON KERRY'S NAVY DOCS
I have been informed of this site, reporting that the After Action reports for the incident that resulted in John Kerry's Silver Star from the U.S. Navy Archives and have posted it online. According to the commentary, they say that the after-action report was written by Kerry, and constitutes a key fact supporting the argument of the Swift Boat Vets for Truth.
The commentary is written by Mark Hyman, vice president for corporate relations for Sinclair, the nation’s largest operator of television stations.
Honestly, my first reaction is, one big earth-shattering story based on thirty-some year old documents at a time, folks.
And yes, the font on the After Action reports looks accurate.
READ THE POST, PRONTO
The Washington Post has another huge story on this — too bad it's running on Page A8.
The lead expert retained by CBS News to examine disputed memos from President Bush's former squadron commander in the National Guard said yesterday that he examined only the late officer's signature and made no attempt to authenticate the documents themselves.
"There's no way that I, as a document expert, can authenticate them," Marcel Matley said in a telephone interview from San Francisco. The main reason, he said, is that they are "copies" that are "far removed" from the originals.
Matley's comments came amid growing evidence challenging the authenticity of the documents aired Wednesday on CBS's "60 Minutes."...
A detailed comparison by The Washington Post of memos obtained by CBS News with authenticated documents on Bush's National Guard service reveals dozens of inconsistencies, ranging from conflicting military terminology to different word-processing techniques.
The analysis shows that half a dozen Killian memos released earlier by the military were written with a standard typewriter using different formatting techniques from those characteristic of computer-generated documents. CBS's Killian memos bear numerous signs that are more consistent with modern-day word-processing programs, particularly Microsoft Word.
"I am personally 100 percent sure that they are fake," said Joseph M. Newcomer, author of several books on Windows programming, who worked on electronic typesetting techniques in the early 1970s. Newcomer said he had produced virtually exact replicas of the CBS documents using Microsoft Word formatting and the Times New Roman font.
Newcomer drew an analogy with an art expert trying to determine whether a painting of unknown provenance was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci. "If I was looking for a Da Vinci, I would look for characteristic brush strokes," he said. "If I found something that was painted with a modern synthetic brush, I would know that I have a forgery."
Meanwhile, Laura Bush became the first person from the White House to say the documents are likely forgeries. "You know they are probably altered," she told Radio Iowa in Des Moines yesterday. "And they probably are forgeries, and I think that's terrible, really."
UPDATE: More strikingly tough criticism of CBS from the Post:
In its broadcast last night, CBS News produced a new expert, Bill Glennon, an information technology consultant. He said that IBM electric typewriters in use in 1972 could produce superscripts and proportional spacing similar to those used in the disputed documents.
Any argument to the contrary is "an out-and-out lie," Glennon said in a telephone interview. But Glennon said he is not a document expert, could not vouch for the memos' authenticity and only examined them online because CBS did not give him copies when asked to visit the network's offices.
Thomas Phinney, program manager for fonts for the Adobe company in Seattle, which helped to develop the modern Times New Roman font, disputed Glennon's statement to CBS. He said "fairly extensive testing" had convinced him that the fonts and formatting used in the CBS documents could not have been produced by the most sophisticated IBM typewriters in use in 1972, including the Selectric and the Executive. He said the two systems used fonts of different widths.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)