CNN identified Bennett only as "CNN contributor" as he praised Rove, bashed Democrats
On the 5 p.m. and 7 p.m. ET hours of the March 19 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, a report by correspondent Brian Todd identified conservative radio host Bill Bennett, who served in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations as Education secretary and "drug czar," only as a "CNN contributor" as Bennett praised White House senior adviser Karl Rove and asserted that congressional Democrats were taking political revenge by probing Rove's role in the dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys.
Introducing Bennett's quote, Todd said that "CNN contributor William Bennett says this effort to get Rove in front of Congress" to discuss the firing of the U.S. attorneys "is part of a Democratic obsession with the man who is credited with engineering Republican victories in two controversial presidential elections and one midterm." On March 16, The Washington Post reported that "three emails" released by the Justice Department show that Rove "asked the White House counsel's office in early January 2005 whether it planned to proceed with a proposal to fire all 93 federal prosecutors." The on-screen graphic similarly identified Bennett as a "CNN contributor":
On March 15, Bennett appeared on CNN's The Situation Room opposite Democratic strategist Paul Begala. Host Wolf Blitzer introduced him as "the host of Morning in America, the radio show, Bill Bennett." On-screen graphics identified Bennett as "Host, 'Morning in America,' " "Former U.S. Education Secretary," and "The Claremont Institute."



On the March 14 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, Blitzer called Bennett a "conservative critic," a "CNN contributor," and "the host of the radio program Morning in America." On-screen graphics identified Bennett as a "CNN contributor," and "Host, 'Morning in America.' "
From the 4 p.m. ET hour of the March 14 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: Coming up, the scandal over fired federal prosecutors -- should the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, resign? I'll ask conservative critic Bill Bennett. He's standing by live.
[...]
BLITZER: Coming up, are conservatives desperately seeking more options in the presidential race? Our CNN contributor, Bill Bennett, standing by to tell us who's generating buzz, who's causing a case of the blahs on the right.
[...]
BLITZER: Joining us now, our CNN contributor, Bill Bennett. He's the host of the radio program Morning in America.
From the 4 p.m. ET hour of the March 15 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: Joining us in today's "Strategy Session," Democratic strategist Paul Begala, and the host of Morning in America, the radio show, Bill Bennett. Guys, thanks very much for coming in.
From the 5 p.m. ET hour of the March 19 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
TODD: That sound Karl Rove hears from up the street could be the political knives being unsheathed for him yet again.
SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D-NY): Karl Rove was in the middle of this mess from the beginning.
TODD: Emails linking the president's top political adviser to the firings of U.S. attorneys have some Democrats believing they've got him this time. But do they?
None of the email puts the firings squarely at Rove's feet. And CNN contributor William Bennett says this effort to get Rove in front of Congress is part of a Democratic obsession with the man who is credited with engineering Republican victories in two controversial presidential elections and one midterm.
BENNETT: I know him. I've worked with him. He's a very smart guy. I can tell you, not everything originates with him.
TODD: But Rove was involved in the CIA leak scandal, acknowledged by journalist Robert Novak as one of his sources for the identity of former operative Valerie Plame Wilson.















Holy crap. Tom DeLay, Richard Perle, Bill Bennett...are the Republicans are having a hard time finding people willing to lie for them any more?
Won't be long before they trot out Kissinger.
Give 'em a break, Nerzog. These days, Bennett, Perle, and DeLay are the most reputable conservatives in America.
Bill, even the concept of revenge belies your point: something must have been done to them, for them to seek "revenge".
Oh, *I* know - Rove lied, paid others to lie, and when that appeared insufficient, hired 'phone jammers, and SCOTUS members and bussed in thugs from 9 states and . . .
Call it what you want, Rove should have been in front of someones committee long ago, and under oath. How stupid does Bush and Rove think we are that we don't see through their ploy to provide "interviews" but not under oath and no records? We are their boss!! WE are the ones they need to answer to through the ones we elected!
as of last night, about 4:30 pm, Bush/Rove et all still think we are stupid.
Crikey, I am an old fat white guy and even I am sick to my stomach with these guys trying to cover for Rove and Bush. I hope this goes to the supreme court and we can see if the newly right washed court will uphold the constition or not.
Constitution, sorry.
Maybe they were just trying to be brief in their description of Bennett.
They also didn't call him an obese, degenerate gambler.
Worrier you might be on to something. Henceforth Rush Limbaugh shall be Viagra-popping drug-addict, Sean Hannity, criminally-insane former construction-worker and Ann Coulter...Well, that just boggles the mind.
They didn't credit his work as lovable barfly Norm on "Cheers", either.
I was think more along the lines of the Harkonen Baron from Dune.
Randy
I enjoyed his work as Jabba.
Another transparent thread by MMFA that isn't put here to provoke any thoughtful discussion about any conservative misinformation, because this is just ridiculous - but rather as an excuse to prompt the posters to haul out the personal slurs at somebody they don't like.
Our slurring is your thoughtful discussion. We must exercise ourselves considerably to devise new, applicable, insults, when, after all, "conservative" or "Repugnant" all by itself covers the territory of evil totally.
You're absolutely right, Tommy.
I feel so ashamed for what I've done.
Or, alternately, it could be to point out that Bennett is a partisan figure, not some objective commentator.
Just a thought.
Isn't everybody partisan? I'd like a list of who's not.
Agreed, they should have said conservative commentator or something like that but who doesn't know who Bill Bennett is? (especially CNN watchers).
Most commentators probably are, and we agree they should all be identified as such.
Most people should know him, but it's hard to be surprised by the public's lack of knowledge of who's who anymore. It's not the biggest deal in the world but it seems like it's lending credibility where little is deserved.
Bill Bennett rarely gets mentioned on this site despite having a daily radio program. I think he's pretty credible but I don't expect the liberals to agree.
"And CNN contributor William Bennett says this effort to get Rove in front of Congress is part of a Democratic obsession with the man who is credited with engineering Republican victories in two controversial presidential elections and one midterm."
Is that credible, considering Rove is linked to the firings? Or was Bennett's views misrepresented there?
They don't cover everything Rush says either, but that doesn't mean he's credible most of the time. If they listed every piece of ridiculous spin puked out onto the airwaves, they'd run out of bandwidth.
I agree the spin here by Bennett is that there is no basis for the Dems to go after Rove other than an obsession. Now, I do agree that there IS an obsession with Rove on the left because he beat them up so badly over the years, but there's also just cause to go after him as well.
Beat us so badly? He lost the popular vote in the first election and Bush got in on a fluke and barely sqeeked him by as a sitting president during a war. My personal problems with Rove have to do with his lowering the bar on personal attacks as politics like his mentor Lee Atwater. I wonder if Karl will do a similar deathbed mea culpa
Within the confines of being a partisan commentator I think he has a fair amount of credibility. Grading on the Coulter, Hannity, Weiner curve he has a tremendous amount. he still IS partisan and that should have been stated. It should not be taken for granted who people know and who they dont.
Maybe someone could devise some sort of graph, with each individual scored on credibility vs level of insanity?
Ann and Weiner get high "I" ratings low "C" ratings.
something like that. That way if you ever forget who someone is, you can look at their scores and see if its okay to believe them, do reseach on your own, pay attention, ignore them, vomit, etc.
"Isn't everybody partisan?"
If we're just talking about commentators who are brought on to offer opinion (as opposed to journalists reporting hard news), then it might be fair to say that by and large their views will contain personal bias. But the point here is that that bias should be noted up front. Bill Bennett is a conservative commentator and he should be billed as such. It's misleading not to do so.
Another transparent thread by MMFA that isn't put here to provoke any thoughtful discussion about any conservative misinformation, because this is just ridiculous - but rather as an excuse to prompt the posters to haul out the personal slurs at somebody they don't like.
Maybe they just put it up to give you a reason to whine.
Could be. Well, one good whine deserves another.
Absolutly NOT ridiculous. When brought on to comment on how DEMOCRATS are acting in a partisan manner it is incombent on them to reveal that Bennet is himself a partisan Republican not doing so in THIS case is irresponsible.
"Another transparent thread by MMFA that isn't put here to provoke any thoughtful discussion about any conservative misinformation, because this is just ridiculous - but rather as an excuse to prompt the posters to haul out the personal slurs at somebody they don't like."
Come on, Tommy. Why do you miss the point so often? Are you doing it on purpose? You so blatantly missed the thrust of this MMFA article (that being the fact that conservative commentators are presented as neutral ones) that I think you must just be trying to inflame the posters here.
One important thing all of you including MM have missed is that William J. Bennett was one of the architects of the Iraq War along with the other notorious members of PNAC. [link to www.newamericancentury.org] other notorious neocon partners of Bennett's in that ignoble effort include:
Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, John Bolton, William Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Zalmay, Khalilzad, Scooter Libby, Richard Armitage, Robert Kagan, Eliot Cohen, and several other people who now run the white house, civilian portions of the Pentagon and Defense Department.
William Bennett was one of the people who directly pressed for the Iraq war for 10 years.
Speaking of PNAC...imagine how the White House will kick and scream when Congress subpoenas those clowns to testify about the distortion of prewar intelligence.
Papajohn said this:
Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, John Bolton, William Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Zalmay, Khalilzad, Scooter Libby, Richard Armitage, Robert Kagan, Eliot Cohen, and several other people who now run the white house, civilian portions of the Pentagon and Defense Department."
Yes, and all of them in their seizures of patriotic flag-waving see fit to send others to do the fighting and dying.
Janus