Blitzer left unchallenged Bennett's claim that U.K. terror arrests "help[ed] the president"
SUMMARY: CNN's Wolf Blitzer failed to challenge Bill Bennett's assertion that the recent arrests of terrorism suspects in the United Kingdom "helps the president." In fact, national polling conducted after the alleged terror plot was exposed indicates that President Bush has received no appreciable boost in public support.
On the August 21 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, conservative radio host and former Reagan Education Secretary Bill Bennett, when asked by host Wolf Blitzer to explain the "slight uptick" in President Bush's approval rating since June in the CNN poll, claimed that the recent arrests of terrorism suspects in the United Kingdom "helps the president." Blitzer offered no challenge to Bennett's claim, which is not supported by national polling conducted after the alleged terror plot was exposed. That polling indicates that Bush received no appreciable boost in public support. Indeed, the CNN poll to which Blitzer and Bennett were referring showed Bush's approval rating went up just two points -- from 40 percent to 42 percent -- since early August, within the poll's margin of error.
The CNN poll, conducted August 18-20, found that Bush's approval rating has risen five points overall since mid-June but only two points since the U.K. terror arrests were first reported on August 11. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.
As Media Matters for America has noted, the claim that the terror arrests gave Bush a "bounce" in the polls has been widely repeated in the media.
From the August 21 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: How do you explain the president's slight uptick?
BENNETT: You [fellow guest and Democratic strategist Donna Brazile] didn't sound like you thought he was up. He is -- well, he is up, he's up some, and these are very difficult times. It's been a very rough summer. Iraq is a very bad situation. And the other situation in the Middle East is very -- is very trying. But I think it's about leadership. I think it's about the fact that people are nervous. I think the London thing scared people, reminded people about terror. And we have been safe, and I think that helps the president.
BLITZER: Five years --
BENNETT: You bet.
BLITZER: -- since there's been a major terrorist attack --
BENNETT: Right.
BLITZER: -- here in the United States, which is something the Republicans clearly will point to. All of us are relieved about that, obviously, as well.
could actually be 0 points or 4 points. Bennett offered his opinion (worth little on any subject). But what the heck, it's just one man's opinion, right or wrong.
I think the real point here is that Blitzer is acting as the journalist in this situation and he put out the question that has no merit, but it is what the media was expecting, so they have to run with it anyway, that Bush got a bounce from the terror attacks. That, to me, is the most telling part of this whole incident. THe media assumed that there would be a bounce. There was none to speak of, so they have to pretend that any blip of a point or two is something worth talking about to prove their point. If they were really critically thinking and willing to explore the true angle, the story would be "why has the president not received the usual bounce from this terror attack?"
The press are like Pavlov's dogs when it comes to Republican talking points, which is that they always assume it is true when in fact they are not.
strategy by admitting that they scared people. It is the sole strategy for the November elections. Bush and Blair are sinking fast, so Blair is trying to distance himself from Bush. A comment on a Guardian(UK) story said Blair should be tied to the sinking ship. If you want to see uncensored news, check out the Guardian. Griping about US coverage does little until Bush&Cheney are deposed.
I haven't been paying attention, thought that terror problem was all fixed.
What the hell is Bennet's rally cry for a poll jump within the margin of error?
We're nervous, we're safe, it's about leadership,we forgot how this Prez alowwed a huge terror attack that he was warned about, you lost me.
I wish Bill Maher's show was on in reruns-If you saw this loaf on "Real Time",Bill Bennett trying to talk his crap somewhere besides among the GOP faithful was priceless.
I cut him some slack, though. I thought he was great on "Cheers". He was Norm, right?
It's safe to assume that Blitzer will NEVER challenge anything that Bennett or any other right-winger says. As someone posted on this site past week, Blitzer just holds the microphone for the GOP commercial.
how can the "man in charge" get any bounce from a terrorist threat, especially considering that he and his are the ones who have been waging war on it for the last 5 years. I believe that the voting public should not be called stupid for voting their mind, but "How stupid can the public be?" Voting for the guy who has not made you safer for the last 5 years, lots of comission and reports back this fact, and people want to give him a pass. ArGGGGGGGhhhhhhhh!
Alright I am calm now.
Bennett is a smart man and knows what he is talking about. If he says there is an advantage for the pres by stopping this attack then there is an advantage. Whether the left approves or agrees with the him is irrelavent. Actually, who really cares what the left thinks, they aren't important to this nation anyway. It's the right that will guide the country OUT of the despair that the left has put us into by creating the immoral country that the enemy has vowed to attack at every opportunity. And, as long as the left refuses to admit to error, the same error will be repeated again and again until they finally learn what they support and promote is exactly the thing the enemy has vowed to destroy. Blaming a single terrorist attack on Bush may feel good to the left, but the reality is that the left seeded the ground that lead to the attack. And, since the left has no accountability, they will naturally blame anyone who isn't a lefty. Good strategy for the left, but will destroy the nation.
Terrorists attacked us because we're a liberal nation, and will continue to do so until we appease them by becoming more right-wing, fundamentalist and conservative like them?
Appeasement? Isn't that what the left is accused of wanting?
Some of us will continue to go the opposite direction of the right- more freedom(or "immorality" as you call it), and further away from the terrorist mindset.
Anytime you'd like to join us in America, let us know.
"If he says there is an advantage for the pres by stopping this attack then there is an advantage."
Your wording is poor. The Pres didn't stop anything. And we're supposed to take Bennett at his word...because he's "smart"? Um, right. "Hey, this partisan hack said it's true, so it must be true!" No. If there were no reported terror plots you guys would be saying that showed the "flypaper theory" was working. It's not a win-win situation for you, you see, no matter how many times you say so.
"It's the right that will guide the country OUT of the despair that the left has put us into by creating the immoral country that the enemy has vowed to attack at every opportunity."
Riiiight. It's our morals that are causing us to be attacked. Which is why the Netherlands is being targeted so much, right? Besides, your posting a lecture about the left's morals while defending Bennett? You really must have no sense of irony at all.
"And, as long as the left refuses to admit to error, the same error will be repeated again and again until they finally learn what they support and promote is exactly the thing the enemy has vowed to destroy."
Refusal to admit error? Sounds like Bush's Iraq policy. And what is the message here? If we cling to our Christian values the radical Muslims will approve of us? That's what they want?
"And, since the left has no accountability, they will naturally blame anyone who isn't a lefty."
And the right is accountable for what, in your mind? Now we hear from the right about how if Iraq fails it's the fault of the Iraqis. Never mind we invaded them and created a power vacuum. Can you imagine a more obvious situation for accountability? Yet the right won't accept it.
Heal thyself, you rabid hypocrite.
I was going to write something similar, but you and H.B.L. covered all that was necessary. No sense beating an insane horse.
My goodness, I don't think that Tommy, AnotherAmerican, or many other conservatives here could have written such bilge on the worst day of their lives.
Muchos Gracias!
" Some of us will continue to go the opposite direction of the right- more freedom(or "immorality" as you call it), and further away from the terrorist mindset. "
Exactly my point. You continue to head in the direction of immorality and you will continue to be a terrorists enemy.
" If we cling to our Christian values the radical Muslims will approve of us? "
They may not approve, but at least they will respect us. There are examples of Christians living with and around Muslims in peace. But, I don't think you'll find ANY examples of immoral liberals living next to Muslims peacefully.
Thanks for confirming your point-
You consider freedom immoral
and liberals are the enemies of terrorists.
Or did I read that wrong?
Good luck with that "giving up your freedoms to get along with terrorists" plan.
These programs are not about discussion of issues. They are about delivering a pre-medidated message. They carefully choose guests with their known views to acomplish that. Sometime if things dont go according to the plan, they may challenge a guest in order to undercut or downplay the opposing views. The message of these programs is usually rightwing.
USA TODAY just announced that their poll showed a 5 point bounce. This does not square with the above article. Do you have a way to test their methodology?Are they lying? Did they fix the numbers? Did they warp their questions? Or have the lies just worked?