Kurtz defended CBS' Roberts's defense of McClellan
On the November 13 edition of CNN's Reliable Sources, host Howard Kurtz defended CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts, who called White House press secretary Scott McClellan a "truth-teller" and "stand-up guy" on the November 6 edition of Reliable Sources. Roberts's November 6 comments came in response to a question from Kurtz, who had asked if Roberts believed that "Scott McClellan owes the press and the public an apology for his -- what turned out to be misleading denial in the CIA leak case." During an October 7, 2003, press briefing, McClellan said that White House senior adviser Karl Rove and former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were "not involved" in the alleged leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. Libby was indicted October 28 on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements in connection with his involvement in the leak, and although Rove has not been indicted, reports clearly indicate he was involved in the leak.
Responding to viewers who were critical of Roberts's comments, Kurtz said on the November 13 Reliable Sources: "For the record, what John Roberts was trying to say was that Scott McClellan didn't deliberately lie or mislead, but that he was given bad information by his colleagues."
Media Matters for America highlighted Roberts's remarks in a November 7 item.
From the November 13 edition of CNN's Reliable Sources:
KURTZ: We got lots of feedback on last week's show after I asked CBS' John Roberts whether White House spokesman Scott McClellan owes the press and the public for an apology for what turned out to be erroneous denials that Scooter Libby and Karl Rove had any involvement in the CIA leak case. Here's what Roberts had to say:
ROBERTS (video clip): I think that he's a truth-teller. I think he's a stand-up guy. And I just think that he was told to carry somebody else's water. And it just turned out that that water was foul.
KURTZ: Ann of Brainerd, Minnesota, wrote, "Since when is it the job of reporters to carry water for and vouch for the president's press secretary?" Judy of Cleveland said, "This guy (McClellan), attacks reporters and accuses them of bias when his whole job is nothing but bias. Stand-up guy? Please." And C. Crutchfield of Washington, D.C., wrote, "I think that if Mr. Roberts can't distinguish between a truth-teller and a liar, he need not be on Reliable Sources." For the record, what John Roberts was trying to say was that Scott McClellan didn't deliberately lie or mislead, but that he was given bad information by his colleagues.
Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike
Jawohl, McClellan was "just following orders."
I saw that and couldn't beleive it. It was bad enough there was a member of the media playing apologist for the Scotty...but then Kurtz who hosted "reliable sources" to exmine the media plays apologist for the apologist.
It is not Kurts place to make excuses for his guests. If they wanted to clarify the record then that person should have released a statement or clarification of his own.
As for Kurtz's interpretation, it doesn't change the criticism one bit. The press' job is to get the truth and ask the tough questions and get to the bottom of stories. they can NOT do that (their job) if they are buddy/buddy with the white house. If they just assume everything Scotty says is the truth, then they can't do their job. It's simply not possible.
As for the excuse that Scotty simply had bad information from other people. Give me a break. Scotty is a PR professional. It is his job to give the White House line on any situtaition and SPIN the facts to present a positive light on what the white house wants. That is his job as a PR person. And based on the very definition of his job, the media has no right or reason to assume he is telling the truth. It isn't his job to tell the truth, it is his job to spin.
When the media can no longer tell the difference between White House Spin and truth/honesty, then there is a problem. Especially when they are only trusting the source because they are buddies with him. What next? When a dem is in office, is their PR person held to the same standard or is he automatically a liar and flak si9mply because the Press isn't friends with him/her? Do all stories then have a negative conotation regardless of the truth as stories now have a positive spin regardless of truth? All based on close and personal feelings the press has for the people they should be questioning and holding accountable?
Kurtz is wrong. The press simply can't do their job if they are too close to the White House and worried they won't be invited to Scotty or Cheney's Christmas Party should they ask a mean question.
Now, I'm prepared to believe that when McClellan said Libby had nothing to do with the leak, he was only saying what he was told to say; I'm even prepared to believe that he believed it himself when he said it. So I don't know that he owes anyone an apology. Certainly someone owes us all - and perhaps him - an apology, but that's a differnent question.
However, a "truth-teller?" A "stand-up guy?" Other than the fact that he is bipedal (and thus can stand), I can't make any sense of those statements. Just consider the other day, when he was defending the Bush administration's opposition to the McCain bill banning torture. "We do not torture," he kept saying.
Helen Thomas asked him about Cheney's lobbying of Congress for an exemption for the CIA from that bill. Her assertion was not in any way controversial; Cheney had been openly lobbying Congress for exactly that. McClellan's response was to repeat the mantra of "we do not torture, the president will do everything to protect the American people."
But, Thomas pursued, did Cheney ask for an exemption or didn't he?
"We do not torture, the president will do everything to protect the American people."
Did he ask for an exemption, yes or no?
"We do not torture, the president will do everything to protect the American people."
They went around this circle a half-dozen times, with McClellan refusing to answer a direct yes or no question even when the answer was an already-established fact, until he cut if off by saying he had answered her question!
Truth-teller? Stand-up guy? What is Roberts on?
Are you saying quadrupeds can't stand? Don't be a speciesist. This is the 21st century for Pete's sake.
1) Kurtz: "For the record, what John Roberts was trying to say..."
What gives Kurtz the authority to interpret Roberts' statement "for the record"? Wouldn't only Roberts have that ability?
2) Roberts: "I think that he's a truth-teller. I think he's a stand-up guy..."
Roberts made a statement supporting the character of McClellan. Kurtz' defense of Roberts ignores this part of Roberts' statement.
Kurtz is a corporate right wing Republican media hack apologist for other right wing conservative corporate media hack apologists like CBS' Roberts.
It's clear that Kurtz was protecting and shielding McClellan.
Methinks Kurtz will vent his "outrage" at MMFA and/or any other liberal bloggers for criticizng him, McClellan, Roberts, or the rest of the hacks for the right wing conservative corporate Republican Party controlled news media.
I saw that and couldn't beleive it. It was bad enough there was a member of the media playing apologist for the Scotty...but then Kurtz who hosted "reliable sources" to examine the media plays apologist for the apologist.
It is not Kurtz's place to make excuses for his guests. If they wanted to clarify the record then that person should have released a statement or clarification of his own.
As for Kurtz's interpretation, it doesn't change the criticism one bit. The press' job is to get the truth and ask the tough questions and get to the bottom of stories. They can NOT do that (their job) if they are buddy/buddy with the white house. If they just assume everything Scotty says is the truth, then they can't do their job. It's simply not possible.
=============================================================
Sadly, I can believe it. Kurtz's criticisms of the media and/or reporters often has cow-tows to the Republicans and/or right wing conservatives, while he and/or his guests criticize the liberal media watchdogs and/or the alternate progressive media.
Kurtz's apologist remarks for CBS' Roberts is obviously so he can stay in the good graces of the rest of the cowardly corrupt conservative Republican media hack ass-kissers.
Anyone doubting this should look to the softball treatment he gave the corrupt cowardly Republican media hack of GE-GOP-NBC's Andrea Mitchell, and before that, Kurtz's collusion with Flush Durgbaugh last year in a so-called "interview."