Limbaugh, O'Reilly baselessly accused media of ignoring Iraq's constitutional referendum
On the October 17 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh accused The Washington Post of "bury[ing]" its coverage of Iraq's constitutional referendum on page A22. In fact, on October 16, the Post ran a story about the vote on page A1 with the headline "Sunni Turnout Is High In Vote on Iraqi Charter; Attacks by Insurgents Largely Halt During Referendum," as well as a story on page A22 under the headline "On the Streets of Iraq, Scenes of Joy and Determination."
Limbaugh said that "this rates page A22 in the mainstream press, as does the Iraqi constitution. That rates A22 -- what -- that's in The Washington Post." Later in the broadcast, he stated, "This has to be recognized and celebrated! It's a disgrace to bury this on page A22." On the same day Limbaugh charged the newspaper with burying the good news, the Post ran a second front-page story on the likelihood of the constitution's ratification.
The underlying theme in Limbaugh's false accusation -- that the media downplayed the good news about democratic progress in Iraq out of anti-American bias -- was echoed later that day by host Bill O'Reilly on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor.
During an interview with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), O'Reilly claimed difficulty finding "a lot of coverage of the Iraq constitutional election. The New York Times [published] a little bit, but not a lot. And I think it's because there is a minority, it's a minority but a powerful one, that wants the USA to lose the conflict in Iraq."
But The New York Times ran a front-page story covering Iraq's constitutional referendum on October 17, the day of O'Reilly's broadcast, and two front-page stories (here and here) on October 16.
(Indeed, in criticizing coverage in The Washington Post, Limbaugh actually pointed to The New York Times for what he falsely claimed to be a contrast, noting that unlike the Post, the Times had gone with front-page "big news out of Iraq.")
The Times also ran an editorial on October 17, "The Sovereign People of Iraq," which read in part:
What we know already, and can't fail to be impressed by, is that large numbers of Iraqis of all persuasions turned out, in defiance of terrorist threats, to decide their constitutional future. They have exercised a basic democratic right that would have been inconceivable just a few years ago."
In addition to front-page stories in The New York Times and The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times led with the Iraq vote on October 15 and printed additional stories (here, here, and here) over the following two days.
Broadcast reports on the referendum began on October 15 with ABC's Good Morning America and CBS' The Saturday Early Show. On October 16, Fox Broadcasting Co. aired a report on Fox News Sunday; ABC's This Week featured an interview with Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq; CBS' Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer interviewed Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) on the topic; and NBC's Meet the Press host Tim Russert interviewed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on the referendum and also led a discussion of the vote.
Also on October 16, host Wolf Blitzer interviewed both Khalilzad and Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's foreign minister, on CNN's Late Edition. Coverage continued that evening on ABC's World News Tonight and NBC's Nightly News.
From the October 17 Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: It -- this is -- this is stunning stuff, and of course, this rates page A22 in the mainstream press, as does the Iraqi Constitution. That rates A22 -- what -- that's in The Washington Post.
[...]
And it goes on, and on, and on to describe what a pleasant day election day was in Iraq. It -- if you look at this, folks, perhaps the most amazing awe-inspiring, positive, and triumphant story of the past two years -- and it's on page A22 of The Washington Post. We have paid for this achievement. We have paid for this achievement with the blood of our sons and daughters. And their families. This has to be recognized and celebrated. It's a disgrace to bury this on page A22.
[...]
Talent on loan from God. Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis. Now to be fair, The New York Times did front-page, the big news out of Iraq. The Washington Post didn't. Page A22. But The New York Times did: "Early Signs Show Iraqis' Approval of Constitution."
From the October 17 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: All right. Let's knock them down. Not a lot of coverage of the Iraq constitutional election. The New York Times a little bit, but not a lot. And I think it's because there is a minority, it's a minority but a powerful one, that wants the USA to lose the conflict in Iraq. They hate Bush so much that they put that hatred above the good of the country. Do you believe that?
GINGRICH: Well, I certainly think that the bias on the left is so great that when something really great happens, they just can't bring themselves to be for it. Just as, and you and I have talked about this before, many feminist groups who would normally be appalled by what the bin Laden faction does to women can't bring themselves to be upset about it because that would put them on the same side as George W. Bush.













Ok, its official not only are Limbaugh and O'Reilly, liars they are shameless. Why cant they at least have enough respect for the intelligence of their audience to make up semi-believable lies?
Because they've learned that their audience will believe ANYTHING.
They just can't let go of this "Liberal Media Bias" myth, can they? NPR covered the Iraqi Constitution extensively, and we all know what a bunch of tree-huggers those guys are, right?
"Talent on loan from God" is another distortion. Rush repeats this all the time, but conveniently fails to mention one rather important factiod. He has talent on loan from God alright - God of the Underworld.
"Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis" is more accurate. Many of us find him to be a master propagandist, with incredible talent at lying and distorting facts. But alas, just about everyday he does meet and surpass our expectations.
laura,
"god of the underworld" good one!
Why would you stop conning dupes? You go back to the well until it dries up. This well, however, will never dry up. There are millions of easy pickings in this country who believe things only a babe in the woods should beleive.
Like everything that has come out of this reconstruction of Iraqi, the American people and the media knows that some how this will later be reported as a farce in which Iraqi citizens were promised goods if they voted for the constitution. We, I know I do, suspect everything this administration has their hand in, and it is not rooted in hate for George Bush. The hatred for George Bush came after he got away with everything he's did, including the killing of men, women and children. I really hate the killing of human being for reasons that had nothing to do with imminent danger to us or the Iraqi people. Why would I not hate that?. The Far right and Mr. Bush should come to grips with the fact that we are not in WWII when there was a true Axis of Evil. The false sense of partiotism that drives this illegal war has made my stomach turn, and I will never be afraid to say it.
Joseph
Joseph...you are so right on and why folks can't see that astounds me! There were Germans in WWII who blindedly followed Hitler and, of course, there were those Germans who knew he was wrong. Time will expose the blokes in this administration...let's just pray that the loss will not be as great as WWII! And my prayer is that those involved in the Iraqi massacre and the killing and maiming of our servicemen and women will be held criminally accountable. Dear Lord, I pray.
As we speak, there are charges of voter fraud in the Iraq referendum. Things like more votes than people - especially in the Shia controlled areas. And it's a no brainer that if Sunnis voted in record numbers they weren't voting for the constitution. But hey, what's a little voter fraud - that's how Bush got to the White House, so it's all good!!!!!
"It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes." -- Joseph Stalin.
I'm not sure whether the media have been "ignoring Iraq's constitutional referendum" or not, but I will say this: most Americans simply do not care about whather Iraqi's have a constitution or not. They'd rather know why their gas costs twice as much as it did 4 years ago.
We're now getting reports of voter fraud and ballot-stuffing. Well, well, well. But conservatives like Limbaugh and O'Reilly know that Bush has hung his presidency on Iraq -- that's all he's got is that and the so-called "war on terror".
I agree with Limbaugh. Fact is, this is just the latest part of Bush's plan, that liberals claim he doesn't or didn't have that has come about right on time and been a tremendous success. It should be the biggest story of the year, yet it is overshadowed by silliness like voter fraud, or at least the allusion of voter fraud. Bush laid out this timetable over two years ago, the transitional government, the formation of a temporary parliamant, the initial vote, and so on, and each and every step has been ON TIME, SUCCESSFUL and less violent then our friends on the left predicted or should I say HOPED FOR. All the while seemingly intelligent people that happen to be Democrats have screamed "what's the plan, what's the plan??" as the plan unfolded exceedingly well before them. Its also interesting to note that the security, terrorist attacks were way down from the last SUCCESSFUL election, was mainly provided by Iraqi troops, and then of course there's that magnificent "turnout" number. One more vote in Dec and while the Iraqi military comes more on line, 2006 will see a serious reduction in American troops levels and 25,000,000 million people will enjoy the soft warmth of freedom and self determination, JUST AS BUSH TOLD US OVER TWO YEARS AGO THAT THEY WOULD!! I wonder how the liberal media will "spin" that one??
The plan was to lose over 2000 American lives?
You learn something new every day.
yipee: "i agree with limbaugh". you agree the media ignored the story?
"a tremendous success"? I think it's a little early to say that. If that were really the case, I think we'd already be planning on leaving Iraq. "the biggest story of the year"? Hardly. I think the suffering of Americans from Hurricane Katrina is far and away more significant -- to Americans -- than a constitution in Iraq.
You say the story is being "...overshadowed by silliness like voter fraud, or at least the allusion of voter fraud." That's not "silly" at all. The fairness of the election must be established, otherwise it means nothing. It's legitimacy that's at stake.
Bush turned over power to the transitional government "on time" even though the Iraqi's weren't ready. That's why we kept our troops there.
"2006 will see a serious reduction in American troops levels and 25,000,000 million people will enjoy the soft warmth of freedom and self determination, JUST AS BUSH TOLD US OVER TWO YEARS AGO THAT THEY WOULD!!" We'll wait on see on that one. If I were a betting man, I wouldn't bet the house.
"the soft warmth of freedom and self determination" -- that's a good one! Self determination? Don't make me laugh. We're staying over there to make sure that we get the government WE want in place. That's hardly "self-determination".
"I wonder how the liberal media will "spin" that one??" I don't know, but you've done a pretty good job of spinning it yourself.
I think Yipee is actually a liberal trying to make conservatives look foolish. Hard to imagine anyone making those statements otherwise.
Same conclusion I came to reading that post. It's seems like a parody of a dolt.
Bush said we went to war in Iraq to (1) disarm Saddam (false) (2) free the Iraqi people (not impose a new form of government on them), and (3) protect the world from a grave threat (false).
yipee - Wednesday October 19, 2005 08:20:27 AM EST -
Bush himself said there is no such thing as a free election in a country that is occupied by foriegn troops. Of course he was talking about Lebbanon when he said it but that doesnt change the fact that by his own standards there have been NO free elections in Iraq
Well, that's an interest perspective, but you disregard some critical facts:
Two thousand lives and 200 billion lost to convert a secular dictatorship, Iraq, a failed experiment in nation building, into 3 Islamic republics ruled under fundamentalist Sharia law.(If this is this the democratic blossom Bush wants to foster, I am unimpressed. Three more fundamentalist Islamic republics don’t make the world safer for anyone but Al Qaeda.) The new Iraqi constitution adds up to a HUGE windfall to the Kurds and the Shiites (oil rights) and Al Qaeda (a fresh supply of Sunni terrorists) but as for what the American public gets out of it? Filled coffins and the bill.
We have paid for this achievement. We have paid for this achievement with the blood of our sons and daughters. And their families. This has to be recognized and celebrated. It's a disgrace to bury this on page A22.
What's happening here is that both of these idiots are hoping their audience will not find a Post or a NYTimes to verify their claims...it's plainly obvious that both Limberger & O'Really pimp their audience on a daily basis & the audience keep coming back for more.
Then they play on the country's patriotic commitment to this effort & know they can suckerpunch their audience time & again
For all those Rush apologists who insist that we liberals take him too seriously, check out the latest issue of Time magazine. Rush has a full page ad with the headline: "Rush Limbaugh, America's Anchor". Anchor? Is he now claiming to be a journalist? (Of course, we all know that the only way Rush could be an anchor is if you tied a rope around his ankles and threw him in the water.)
Of course, we all know that the only way Rush could be an anchor is if you tied a rope around his ankles and threw him in the water. - from nerzog
Wouldn't work. There's no way that much hot air would ever sink.
Maybe he could be a buoy instead.