Largely ignoring alleged Bush disclosure authorization, Fox News devoted more than twice as much time to covering McKinney controversy
SUMMARY: After the revelation that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former vice presidential chief of staff, testified that President Bush allegedly authorized him to disclose classified portions of an NIE pertaining to Iraq's purported weapons of mass destruction, Fox News largely ignored the story, preferring instead to focus on the controversy surrounding Rep. Cynthia McKinney's alleged altercation with a Capitol Police officer.
After the revelation that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former vice presidential chief of staff, testified that President Bush allegedly authorized him to disclose classified portions of a 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) pertaining to Iraq's purported weapons of mass destruction, Fox News largely ignored the story, preferring instead to focus on the controversy surrounding Rep. Cynthia McKinney's (D-GA) alleged altercation with a Capitol Police officer. A Media Matters for America review of Fox News coverage of these two events found that from noon to 10:00 p.m. ET on April 6, Fox News devoted more than twice as much time discussing McKinney's alleged altercation with the police officer (53 minutes) than to reporting on the revelation that Bush may have authorized Libby to reveal then-classified intelligence information to the media (25 minutes). Libby's revelation was drawn from court papers FBI special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald filed in the government's case against Libby, who has been charged with five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to the FBI, related to the leak of then-CIA undercover operative Valerie Plame's identity.
The New York Sun, which broke the story and posted the "Web Exclusive" to its website at 9:02 a.m. ET on April 6, reported that Libby "testified to a grand jury that he gave information from a closely-guarded 'National Intelligence Estimate' on Iraq to a New York Times reporter in 2003 with the specific permission of President Bush, according to a new court filing from the special prosecutor in the case." As an April 6 Associated Press report noted:
[T]he disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.
The authorization came as the Bush administration faced mounting criticism about its failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the main reason the president and his aides had given for going to war.
Both MSNBC and CNN first covered the story at the top of the noon hour, and spent significant time throughout the day reporting on the breaking news. By contrast, Fox News did not initially report on the findings until approximately 12:20 p.m. and then apparently decided, as conservative talk show host and columnist Larry Elder later stated during the April 6 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, to "get back to the real issue, here": Cynthia McKinney.
As illustrated by the graphs below, Fox News devoted twice the amount of coverage to the McKinney incident, her April 6 apology to Congress, and speculation over whether she would be indicted for the incident, as it devoted to covering the latest developments in the CIA leak investigation.
From noon to 10:00 p.m., Fox News anchors, commentators, reporters, and guests mentioned Bush's alleged authorization a mere 11 times as opposed to 21 mentions of the McKinney controversy. They spent approximately 25 minutes discussing the news of the alleged leak compared to 53 minutes spent on the latest development in the McKinney incident. In fact, while every Fox News program between noon and 10:00 p.m. featured at least one report on McKinney, several shows -- including Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O'Reilly Factor -- did not report on Libby at all.
During the 9 p.m. hour, Hannity & Colmes spent approximately 11 minutes covering McKinney, compared with about 1 minute discussing the CIA leak investigation. Except for a news brief, the program mentioned Libby only during a debate over the McKinney controversy, when co-host Alan Colmes asked Elder if it was correct that Republicans "would rather talk about Cynthia McKinney" than "about the leak information that came out today." Elder responded:
ELDER: Well, I guess that's why you brought it up. Bringing up the "Scooter" Libby thing because that's what you really want to talk about. Let's get back to the real issue, here [McKinney].
Further, according to her website, Fox News host Greta van Susteren admitted that her show, On the Record, which airs at 10:00 p.m. ET, also did not cover the Libby story. Van Susteren stated that she "pulled the plug on doing the segment after spending about two hours studying the pleadings" because "the more I studied it, the more I realized that it is complicated and I want to make sure I get it right."
Continuing, van Susteren suggested that Fox News had adequately covered the story and stated that she would cover it the following night only if she could figure out how to "do it differently from what has already been done" or if "some new information emerges today":
This is not to take from the many other news organizations -- and my own -- who covered the story, I just wanted to study it further. It is a very important story and since so many shows were doing it, I felt comfortable being a bit more cautious and pulling back.
[...]
If I can figure out how to advance the story, or do it differently from what has already been done, we will cover it on our show tonight. I also need to measure in my mind whether it has been done and done and done in the last 24 hours and if we are now too late (because I dragged my feet yesterday!) If some new information emerges today, then even if the story was done by everyone yesterday -- and it was -- it becomes a new story today.
Moreover, as TVNewser reported on April 7, Fox News failed to cover the White House briefing, where press secretary Scott McClellan "was quizzed about Bush's involvement in the leaks." Both CNN and MSNBC aired portions of McClellan's April 7 White House press briefing.
From the April 6 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
COLMES: Larry, you know, on a day when we find out, that according to "Scooter" Libby, that President Bush leaked information, leaked it for his own well-being, and Cheney was involved, as well, Republicans, I guess, would rather talk about Cynthia McKinney, who, in fact, did apologize. I guess that's easier, or better for the Republican agenda than to talk about the leak information that came out today. Right?
ELDER: Well, I guess that's why you brought it up. Bringing up the "Scooter" Libby thing because that's what you really want to talk about. Let's get back to the real issue, here.
COLMES: I think it's more important for the country.
In is "your word" segment, Gibson even answered an e-mail asking him why such a different coverage asking something like "do you really think the the president declassified some previously classified document is news ?" : most ridiculous item of the day, isn't it ?
These aren't just "some documents" -- these are documents released for the specific purpose of convincing the country to go to war, cherry-picked, despite the gargantuan lack of evidence that Saddam had WMDs. (From the intel community, who turned out largely to be right) So--clearly no, not even CLOSE to the most ridiculous of the day.
My guess is that it had more to do with the newness and sellability of the story than with any conspiracy or bias. The whole Plame thing does not interest the country anymore like it once did (a sad reflection on our society, perhaps). A congresswoman hitting a copper is more sensational (and we all know sensationalism is the key to news these days).
While the Plame case may be more important eventually, it doesn't draw the same number of viewers as a congresswoman hitting some police officer, saying it was racial profiling, saying she never said it was racial profiling, accusing all the cops of racism, holding a press conference with quasi-celebrities, and finally realising that the majority of the country disagreed with the way she was handling the situation, and apologising.
That's the sad story of news in today's sorry state.
FOX is a shill propaganda machine for the GOP. It's more than just ratings...or what people find 'interesting'... it's willfull. Been shown time and again. FOX plays as big a role in diversion of attention away from any GOP screwup than the Bushies themselves.
Oh, what a shame! It's not that the neo-con propogandists at Fox, on AM radio, and in the WSJ actually want to cover McKinney - it's that they have to! The ignorant masses just eat this stuff up - and they're too dumb to follow the Plame story...
Give me a break.
I guarantee you this: if Bill Clinton EVER leaked classified information from an NIE through Al Gore's office for his own political purposes, and the information was falsely ginned up to start a war, Fox would NEVER stop talking about it. And their viewers would eat it up and ask for thirds.
Fox's viewers will take what they are given like good sheep - Fox feeds their world view, which is shaped as much by the misery in their own lives as it is by political events.
Fox will spin any story to make it palatable to them - if they can't, they will ignore it.
You are right that it's all about ratings and it's not some grand conspiracy. But you are wrong about what's driving the ratings.
It has nothing to do with the newness of the story or anything else like that. It has to do with the Fox listener demographic. Fox listeners are white, mostly male, middle-adged, and very conservative. So here's what's going on.
1) They don't want to hear about the misdeeds of their steadfast leader.
2) They love hearing about the misdeeds (however slight) of a liberal black congresswoman.
So, all businesses must cater to their customer base. Simple as that.
Ciao,
Rick
I really don't understand the relevance of how many times fox news reported on two issues from noon to 10:oo PM. What about msnbc or cnn? And what about a full 24 hours of coverage?
I am new to this site and have seen no analysis of cnn or msnbc. I hope their is some. I don't see the point in getting upset about any two issues being reported less frequently unless their is something to compare it to. Did cnn or msnbc report on McKinner twice as much or was it only fox? The only way to demonstrate bias is to compare all the networks.
Sorry, I might be missing the point but how does foxnews reporting on McKinney twice as much prove bias?
Funny thing how Bill O'Reilly, Jerry Springer and anything anti-Black is "sellable" but Truth is not. Says a lot about what kind of society we live in.
BTW Cynthia McKinney apologized because its time to get rid of Bush and his cronies once and for all. She realized it would be a political mistake to allow neocons to use her to distract attention. F the Capitol Police, we got big fish to fry.
Hey Cons I bet you thought your tyranny was going to last forever huh? I love it. Scooter sings...and they all fall down ROFLMAO
...to the DHS officials involved in kiddie porn?
American people, the President has the legal authority to spy on you without a warrant and leak classified information to the press in order to prevent his lies for war from being exposed.
Speaking about eavesdropping and exposing...the Department of Homeland Security is interested in dirty pictures of your children.
But black woman with "brillo pad factory" hair slightly overreacting to an aggressive cop is what you need to be focusing on.
It's the brown people you need to worry about. Especially if they're Democrats.
After all, the President is lying to you in order to keep you safe because the terrorists "hate our freedoms".
Forget censure and impeachment. This President and his propaganda wing at Fox News need to be exiled. Better yet, maybe they can pick our fruit for us.
...for attempting to quote Boortz's description of Cynthia McKinney in my last post.
Fox should NOT denote themselves as Fair&Balanced, that is false advertising. Of course I DOUBT they are fooling many people--outside of a few hard line partisans. Fox News IS without ANY doubt a propaganda arm of the Bush administration, and on a lesser scale, the Republican Party.
But since you and I and every HONEST person here realizes THAT, why would anyone be shocked at which stories they would EMPHASIZE. Of course they would ACCENTUATE any story that puts Democrats/Liberals in a bad light. While they do report less than stellar conduct of Republicans, they will ALSO be sure to attempt to put a POSITIVE spin on it or try to DISMISS it as unimportant.
As far as the McKinney brouhaha, while on the surface one could SPIN it as "overreacting to an aggressive cop", I think it's a bit MORE important than many HERE seem to be willing to admit.
Stopping an unauthorized person from access in certain areas within the Capital Building is a SECURITY issue. THAT is what makes the story IMPORTANT... IF any man or woman WITHOUT proper credentials IGNORES a Security Checkpoint they should be stopped. IF they IGNORE Police VERBAL warnings to halt, then the Police are within their RIGHTS to PHYSICALLY STOP THEM. And the Police should be able to do their DUTY without getting assaulted.
Yes Fox has probably gone overboard on their coverage on THIS particular story while playing down or even ignoring other important stories...BUT this story deserves to be covered. It is NOT a story about a Woman, or an African-American being UNDULY harassed. It is a SECURITY story. And IF anyone should be blamed for the story remaining in the SPOTLIGHT, I think you should look no further than Ms. McKinney herself. She could have diffused the coverage on DAY ONE by admitting she'd made an error.
Considering how much coverage Liberal sites and news outlets gave the Cheney hunting accident, I do find it a bit disingenuous of some here to complain about the EXTENDED coverage of the McKinney story. But like McKinney, Cheney ALSO could have diffused the coverage by reporting the accident immediately or holding a press conference and taking questions from reporters.
McKinney&Cheney both allowed their "situations" to become more controversial by their own personal actions. OR if you will, non-actions.
Oh please stop. You people are paranoid about a tiny black congresswoman nudging her own security with a cell phone while you ignore Bush selling control of our ports to a foreign government with more ties to 911 than Saddam ever had.
I wouldn't be surprised if McKinney reacted like she was a runaway slave on a GOP plantation because after all, she is...at least for now. She and most other black congressmen and women (and a few whites who subsequently got a taste of what its like to be black) were the only ones who had the good sense to stand up to the murdering liar you and your ilk put in office. As Michael Moore pointed out (who also found out what its like to be black for speaking the truth) they were ignored then and ignored now- the only thing we're supposed to pay attention to is a congresswoman nudging her own security with a cell phone. Meanwhile, it took you a decade to figure out Bush is what we told you all along: a dangerous moron. Now who's crazy?
How much of these sicko right wing why-t neocons taking over control of the House, Senate, Supreme Court, White House, Mass Media with corrupt white supremacist imbeciles, loudmouths, militiamen and pedophiles do you think people can stand before they snap?
heru, though I know in advance that it's a waste of my time to even TRY to have a reasonable discussion with YOU, I do want to clear up a few of your inaccuracies and misrepresentations.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"You people are paranoid about a tiny black congresswoman nudging her own security with a cell phone while you ignore Bush selling control of our ports to a foreign government with more ties to 911 than Saddam ever had."...by heru
=====
Ah so now one must be PARANOID to have the audacity to question Ms. McKinney's BEHAVIOR? You do realize how absurd that sounds--don't you? heru, IF you blow by a security checkpoint and refuse to stop when ordered to--what may I ask do you expect the Police to do? Come on heru, even YOU know the correct answer to that question....
As far YOUR allegation that I or anyone else IGNORED Bush "selling control of our ports to a foreign government"...where have you been heru? Under a rock? IF you read or watched the news at all YOU would had to have been AWARE that MOST Republicans&Democrats were UNITED on this issue--and voiced their DISAPPROVAL of the deal. And it was THIS bi-partisan effort that forced Bush to back off and kill the deal.
On a personal note, I encourage YOU to check the archived threads on this very TOPIC. You'll find I spoke out quite forcefully AGAINST the Dubai Ports Deal.
But I know YOU don't like to concern yourself with facts. You'd rather just throw around assumptions posing as facts.
As far as the rest of your rambling post and most of your posts in general, well I don't necessarily disagree with some of your opinions...It's your angry juvenile delivery that has grown to be monotonous. IF you think this type of communication serves you well... you are mistaken.
Oh please. You stole two elections, put this obvious moron in office twice, and then claim credit for disagreeing with his nth scandal? Thank you for your oh so reasonable Chris Matthewish opinion but just because these crawling dogs you put in office are about to get thrown out - and you'd rather switch than fight - doesn't mean everyone forgets.
The day will come soon when, like Nixon lovers, you won't find a single person who will admit they voted for Bush. But locusts don't fool me, they re-emerge when conditions are right and start the same crap all over again. I'd rather keep spraying pesticide thank you.
The most sickening part to me though is the folks that supported the war (claims of 70%) and now about the same percentage are against it. Those who switched sides are the most despicable of them all. What kind of people are these anyway. You look at these folks and you see how easy it was for Hitler to gain power.
They waved their flags and were so excited about sending someone else's sons to die. The blood of those young men and women are on their hands
^5
However stop with the unauthorized she IS a congresswoman, she was NOT unauthorized. The Capitol police have ONLY 535 constituents, thats all. They service ONLY Congress. It isnt too much to ask that they KNOW those 500 people. McKinney is not new to congress. She has been there a while. She had a good reason to be upset, its also NOT like she punched the guy. Were her actions uncalled for sure but they werent anything horrific. You act like she pulled a knife on the guy. HE should have known her and approached her thinking she might be a congressperson and treat her accordingly, he did HIS job poorly at best. I would be fired in a heartbeat if I were half as incompetent. That doesnt excuse her actions, which were not violent, however there is plenty of blame to go around and there really isnt that much there there.
Hadn't thought of it that way, but with the GOP in majority power, able to set the agenda and pass the laws, the representatives of the black folks is ... ZERO.
That might help explain Iraq, Katrina, and a host of OTHER issues where it is evident that those with a proportionately LARGER stake in the issue have virtually no say in the policy ...
Correct and its even worse than that. Mere black annihilation is not enough for the devil. Zero representation is bad enough but on top of it, the neocons manufacture and prop up anti-black negroes like Jesse Peterson, Larry Elders, Armstrong Williams ad nauseum to take us way beyond zero into negative numbers.
If you don't like Fox, don't watch it.
This is a free country, no one is forcing people to watch Fox. You can watch CNN or MSNBC. But, Fox has 11 of the top 12 cable news programs, so I guess people like Fox. It's called free market, not communism.
Their slogan is "Fair and Balanced." It's been proven many times that they are not. They are deliberately lying to their audience. Do you have a problem with that? I sure do. And it has nothing to do with "communism."
I also love that "If you don't like it, don't watch it," argument. They [MMFA and its members, among others] watch it to report on lies and deceptions. And it's good for you; every now and then, you just need to have it thrown in your face to remind you why you're a progressive. Get the ol' juices flowin' again, y'know?
Who's calling for FNC to be pulled from the airwaves? Nobody.
There's nothing wrong with media criticism. "If you don't like it, don't [read/listen/watch] it", is not criticism.
Amy_from_Ohio wrote: But, Fox has 11 of the top 12 cable news programs, so I guess people like Fox. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Fox is so popular, then why are the President's poll numbers so low and why is military recruitment down? And where is all the good news from Iraq?
I think people watch Fox for the pure entertainment value of watching the spin cycle. Comediens can't make up fake newscasts that look and sound funnier than Fox News segments.
But, I agree. We do live in a free country. And we should have a free press. And that's why blatant propaganda from corporate media outlets should be exposed and criticized.
You make a good point that if FOX is so popular as AMY in OHIO brags with such obvious pride, then why has the nation turned against Bush and his GOPers?
The answer is simple; FOX is the biggest fish in a very SMALL pond stocked with one peculiar variety of fish.
Bush arguably got 50 MILLION votes last election. How many were viewers of FOX's Number ONE program, Bill O'Reilly? He boasts about 2 million viewers ... that's only 4% of the GOP voting public (in rough numbers). So, how influential IS FOX, considering their bonzer cable popularity? The answer is, not very.
The cumulative effect of ALL of Rightwing Media control, to INCLUDE CNN, MSNBC, all of AM radio, etc., cannot be downplayed, of course. Between them, they managed to propagandize America into believing LIES told by this Administration, and then into being fearful for their lives it the "other guys" ever got into office.
Despite all this, the GOP's margins of victory have been tiny. As the saying goes, it was support a mile wide but a molecule deep. And those marginal supporters have mostly turned, in the face of all the TRUTH that is emerging despite the MEDIA's best efforts to be PRAVDA to the GOP.
So, let AMY bask in the glory of O'Reilly's 2 million viewers. That 4% of Bush's "margin of victory" will not offset the 96% who reject his brand of daily propaganda, and will turn the GOP out this next election cycle.
MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, AND NOW CBS IS NOTHING BUT ANOTHER FOX NEWS!!!!!
...if you'll be working hard to make sure the elections in your state are on the up-and-up this year?
[link to www.cleveland.com]
Or, is that also part of your "free market" theory?
so why are you griping about it?
"The recount gave Kerry 17 extra votes and took six away from Bush"
From the article...
"But observers suspected that the precincts were not randomly chosen and asked a board worker about it, said Toledo attorney Richard Kerger. The worker acknowledged that there had been a precount. "
In other words, the 'safeguard' in place to help monitor whether or not the electronic machines were in keeping with the actual handcount -- i.e. the 'random' choosing of various precincts -- was predetermined. If the voting was rigged (in favor of Bush), it's likely that Kerry-friendly precincts were not chosen (randomly or otherwise)...and probably the worst hit by fraud. If they don't check, I guess we don't know.
Maybe Bush would've won anyway...? Regardless, if there is any question of voter fraud, it makes the election a fake, a phony. This is not just my opinion. This -- as I'm sure you know -- has been the suspicion since 2004. It'll be interesting to see what the investigation shows. I'm sure FOX will be all over it. And, you can bet your ass the November elections will be keenly monitored.
"the workers were so tired and didn't want to hassle with doing a hand recount."
NEWSFLASH: Americans are just too tired for Democracy.
---So what?"---
It's the difference between complacency (referring to your comment, above) vs. people taking action.
We might note that, as GW Bush did his charm/fear initiative this last week, blitzing the news with daily speeches and taking questions, making a gargantuan effort to improve his popularity numbers and support for his war in Iraq, FOX covered it extensively.
Between Bush and FOX, Bush's numbers ... actually went DOWN. How can that BE? Historically, a president in a slump only had to go before the American people and talk to them, and that BOOST in numbers was automatic. The Bully Pulpit was reliable as a remedy to falling numbers, putting the president back "IN TOUCH" with the American People.
ROVE miscalculated, because it's finally hitting home; the PRESIDENT talking to the people only works if the president is BELIEVED and RESPECTED. This president is neither. Further, the COVERAGE Media, like FOX, have no credibility EITHER. If you see it on FOX, you know it is neither FAIR nor BALANCED: it is PROPAGANDA.
So, we have the phenomena of a president doing everything in his power to boost his numbers, and it has the OPPOSITE effect. The more people see and hear him (lying), the less they like him.
I wonder how Rove, having forced Bush to do what he hates the most -- speak to the public and try to explain himself -- explained to Bush that it was all for nothing?
Rove was nicknamed by Bush "TURD BLOSSOM" for his ability to have the beautiful flower sprout out of the heap of cow manure. This time, the heap of cow manure was clearly visible, but no flower in sight.
Bush will have to assign a different nickname to his pal Rove. I suggest just removing the "blossom" part.
Tommy, thought you had disappeared.
This Post was misplaced.
Fox News isn't just some entertainment show. It's pretending to be a "fair and balanced" source of information and is anything but. Roger Ailes, it's head, is the former producer of the failed Rush Limbaugh TV show. He's largely Xeroxed Rush's politics into a phony debate news style format to attract the same angry white conservative male audience favored by Rush and other right-wing talk radio shills. No big surprise some of Fox News' anchors and stars like Tony Snow and Bill O'Reilly also have gigs as radio hosts on right-wing hate radio syndicated programs.
Anybody is welcome to tune into Fox News or tune out of Fox News, as you suggest. But all media sources need to be watch-dogged because of the critical function they provide in a free society. Without an honest press, society can't accurately make critical decisions as they participate in our democracy.
Fox News is abusing this trust on a scale not seen since the muckraking journalists of the turn of the last century. So, if people choose to watch Fox News, nothing more than a shameless shill of right-wing politics, they should do so knowing exactly what it is.
And they are ALL dwarfed by the network news, a cartoon sponge, American idol, and desperate housewives. Popularity in no way means quality. If you dont like this site dont the exit is right over there. We will somehow soldier on without your troll antics
Tommy!!!!!!!
I would suggest you look closer at the Fox News Ratings. Not only are they dropping but people are tired of the predictability of Fox News.
I suggest people watch the movie "Outfoxed".
Fox News is like comfort food for the conservative. Whenever Bush is having a bad day his supporters can tune into FoxNews and feel good about themselves and their place in the their world.
You know, you gotta love these lurking neocons who, when chastised about their glowing support of Fox News, say, "If you don't like it, turn it off/change the channel'. What ever happened to that attitude when Janet Jackson had her oh-so-famous wardrobe malfunction? Whatever happened to that attitude when a network (forgot the name) showed two guys kissing on t.v.?
Be as smug as you want, but don't be a hypocrite. It just makes you neocons look as silly as you really are. My advice to you, leave the 1950's behind and join us in the 21st century.
CSL
Oh Amy, Amy, you certainly have a point except for one major flaw in your reasoning. Unfortunately, people who watch Fox News vote and because they vote we have the worst government in the history of this country.
Yes, it is a free market but there should be some standards. If a station is going to broadcast news it should make sure that the news is true and it should make sure that its viewpoint is unbiased. Fox News does neither. It is the most unfair, most unbalanced, most biased news channel on the air. And the fact that it does have so many top-rated shows do not prove that it is a quality station. Rather it just proves that there are alot more gullible fools out there than one could have originally predicted.
than Bush. They are taking the scandal as if it was them. Relying on the kid game of faking a punch and then saying, "if you weren't guilty then you wouldn't have dodged" we can say the media must be guilty. As I recall the last national election and how they "sound byted" Bush it's not all that unexpected. Look at all the real news on the Internet that the media never reports like the fellow who told bush he should be ashamed of himself, feel guilty. Bush said "let him talk" knowing the media would not report it of if they did down play it.
ARE YOU SURPRISE!!! THAT'S WHAT FOX NEWS IS FOR. AND THEY WILL BE THE FIRST TO NO IF MCKINNEY WILL BE GOING TO COURT, BECAUSE YOU KNOW THERE SPY IN THE GRAND JURY IS THE REP. WHO SAW WHAT HAPPEN THAT DAY. THEY NEED TO MAKE THERE BRAINWASHED VIEWERS FEEL GOOD ABOUT SOMETHING NOW THAT BUSH AND THE GOP POLL NUMBERS ARE DOWN.
Absolutely ridiculous. Fox's extended coverage-done solely to stoke Roger Aile's continuing Republican political propoganda furnace-of the very minor, inconsequential Capitol Police incident with McKinney is so out of proportion to the Bush's lying and leaking (or to the Vice President of the United States actually *shooting* someone in the face with a gun) that it is completely absurd-even for this so-called "news" channel.
I know I posted this in the other McKinney thread, but it really is must-read stuff. Of course we have to rely on a BBC reporter to get this story out there because nobody in the mainstream American media is going to give us this background info on why the right really hates McKinney:
[link to www.alternet.org]
Very informative. BTW, last night I heard Bill Maher repeat the Bush pre-9-11 accusation myth to McKinney during an interview. Expunging these brewed-up rightwing lies from the American intelligentsia is near impossible. Even reasonably intelligent people are susceptible to this BS, which proves how DANGEROUS it is to allow so-called media outlets like Fox to tout their propaganda as news. Lying ad infinitum to undermine the truth is not freedom of speech. It's totalitarianism.
[link to www.leftwatch.com]
Even though in a stunning display of bad writing he doesn't quote the quote he says doesn't exist, we all know it does exist and this article has the direct transcripts.
Keep lying Greg, that is what you are good at.
that the site you mention (and yes i looked at the link) is a right-wing/biased site.
maybe if it was in a "mainstream" news site it might have more credibility... (at least to me)
and even then I wouldn't be so sure.. the right wing does tend to exact revenge on people (you could ask Joe Wilson about that..)
The right-wing site doesn't give any direct quotes from McKinney saying she thought BushCo knew in advance about 9/11; the NPR interviewer is quoted as saying she implied that. The other piece from her web site says no such thing: [link to www.ratical.org] She says there that it could be that BushCo has profited from 9/ll financially.
whether the bushies knew in advance of the attacks or not, they certainly have taken advantage to further their insane warmongering megalonamia. The important thing to be looking at is what is being done in the guise of fighting terrorism by the bushies. ..eavesdropping on innocent people; imprisoning innocent people; Halliburton enriching themselves on taxpayer dollars while shortchanging soldiers...shortchanging the veterans...cutting back programs that help the poor...
Endlessly picking apart what this person or that person says about it is a diversion.
"Even though in a stunning display of bad writing he doesn't quote the quote he says doesn't exist...
He's trying to prove McKinney didn't say something - you want him to quote her saying it?
Funny.
Asking what did they know is NOT the same as saying they knew, swing and a miss. As for the suggestion they could profit from the war and Bush sr is a member of Carlyle well thats just a well known fact. It might be hardcore rhetoric but its NOT out of bounds, its simple truth
This clearly shows that Fox NEws is nothing more than a propaganda tool for the white house. When a story breaks out that is unfavorable for the Republican party, Fox News waits a long time before reporting on it. I bet you it's because they are waiting for the White House memos on how to spin the story.
As had been posted previously, this is FOX News we're talking about, so i'm not surprised they're yapping about the McKinney story vs bush and his cronies with regards to the NIE story..
But then again in "con-world", McKinney is just another "uppity negro"
They only pay us any mind when we're denigrating each other - they love that..
When this story first broke, despite the fact that many of the reports I saw didn't place Libby's statements in their proper context, (GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT'S THIRD MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY), I started wondering how Fox News would dilute the importance of the story.
I began flipping between CNN and MSNBC to get an idea of what it all meant. By mid-afternoon I decided to watch Fox News. What I saw was truly sickening! Fox News seemed to ignore the story in general. And when it did report on it, right wing pundits began appearing before the Fox News cameras to dismiss other reports about the story as being over-hyped or that had been "breathless reporting" about it, or they repeatedly used the word conflated to describe the supposed artificial ties between Libby's statements and the outing Valerie Plame. Or they simply said that the President can declassify any document he wants. (He does have that authority. And curiously he seems to be the first president in history to give that authority to the vice-president)
Yet hardly anybody on the left seemed to be tying the Valerie Plame story to the newly released statements. And while political arguments on both CNN and MSNBC contained points of view that included the supposed hypocrisy of a president who strongly decries the leaking of classified information - and the allegation that he himself authorized the release of such information for "clarification" purposes, Fox News (Britt Hume, Fred Barnes and on and on and on) seemed to overlook that point!
And what makes matters even more complicated is the fact that an AP report has come out on Sunday that seems to indicate that the president may not have specifically authorized the path that information should take but, according to writer Jennifer Loven, "Bush merely instructed Cheney to "get it out" and left the details to him"...
So we can expect another parade before Fox News cameras with lots of people saying they don't know what all the fuss is about. Watching Fox News, after all, is like watching the world from inside George Bush's head!
Why is it that the Republicans to have Blacks represent and deliver most of their racial issue ? This is a poor way to gain Black support or prove they do not have a negative racist history. Even in slavery time, there has always been one ore two Blacks on the wrong side of the fence. In the early times we called them "Uncle Toms;" today they are known as Black Republicans.
I have posted many opinions relating to distortion and the diversion practices of the Bush administration. The Right Wing media is being true to the same attempt to keep Americans talking about everything but the things that can really hurt the Republican Party or the Bush administration. Today Cynthia McKinney was front and center for Republican diversion; yesterday it was immigration; the day before that it was something else to divert the public from the real issues that could hand our president impeachment or change control of both Houses. The Republicans and Bush are in the fight of their lives, and it did not take 40 years to get there.
Joseph
That Mr. Elder has been singing this song for a very long time! You'll note the ease with which he shows his anger about Cynthia McKinney. It's as if she personally insulted him.
He must certainly feel he'll get an attaBOY from his right wing buddies. Unfortunately, in private, they just may think he's nothing more than comic relief!
When I'm asked (and I'm asked this a lot) why most black people don't support the Republican Party, I remind them that the faces of black conservatives are: Ward Connerly, Jesse Lee Peterson and Larry Elder! People who always appear to be ANGRY at other black people, for some reason.
And I'd prefer not to join a political party to be angry at anybody!
Seem as though the liberal biased media have missed reporting on this non-news story (NIS leak) and devoted valuable time and resources to that news worthy McKinney story.
Hatche
I think that the media is fixated on this McKinney story because she brought the race card into it. Had she apologized i think that the media would have spent far less time on it.
I do think that they are spending too much time on this. I also think that it is amusing that Tom (Mr. Unethical himself) Delay is bring up ethics charges on Mrs. McKinney.