About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

In Wash. Post, Kurtz failed to note "neutral" Bennett's campaign contributions to McCain, Romney

February 05, 2008 2:10 pm ET
image

SUMMARY: In a Washington Post article about conservative radio hosts' opposition to Sen. John McCain's presidential bid, Howard Kurtz reported that Bill Bennett, "who is neutral in the race," has not "climb[ed] aboard the stop-McCain bandwagon." But Kurtz did not mention, as he did on his CNN program, that Bennett reportedly contributed more than $2,000 to McCain's campaign in December 2007 and to Mitt Romney's campaign in January, which raises questions about "whether Bennett can act as a neutral analyst in a race that still includes Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul," according to The Huffington Post.

24 Comments

In a February 5 Washington Post article about conservative radio hosts' opposition to Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) presidential bid, media critic Howard Kurtz reported: "Not all right-leaning hosts are climbing aboard the stop-McCain bandwagon." Kurtz continued: "Bill Bennett, the author and former Reagan administration official, who is neutral in the race, has resisted pressure from his listeners to back another candidate." But Kurtz did not note, as he did during the February 3 edition of his CNN program, Reliable Sources, that Bennett, who is a CNN contributor, gave money to McCain's presidential campaign in December 2007. Also, unlike in his Reliable Sources report, Kurtz's Post article ignored that, according to CNN, Bennett gave money to Mitt Romney's Republican presidential campaign in January. However, there are still two other Republican candidates to whom Bennett has not contributed: former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul (TX).

On February 2, The Huffington Post reported that Bennett had given more than $2,000 in December 2007 to McCain's campaign, without disclosing that he had done so, and questioned "whether Bennett can act as a neutral analyst in a race that still includes Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul":

Last December, conservative author and CNN election analyst William J. Bennett gave over two thousand dollars to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign, a fact that Bennett has not mentioned during any of his appearances on the network, according to a review of transcripts by the Huffington Post.

Moreover, after giving the donation, Bennett claimed on-air that he was neutral in the GOP race, even as he repeatedly dispensed advice to McCain on how he could win over doubtful conservatives.

Following Wednesday's GOP debate in Los Angeles, Bennett exclaimed on CNN that he "had three hours of calls this morning of people angry at me because I was defending John McCain."

"I don't have a candidate," he protested. "I haven't endorsed anybody."

In fact, on December 31, 2007, Bennett contributed the maximum primary amount, $2300, to McCain's campaign. [See Bennett's fundraising details on Huffington Post's FundRace.]

Informed of the donations, a CNN official said that Bennett also gave an unspecified amount to Mitt Romney's campaign in January 2008, which would not show up on the latest campaign filings.

Last month, Talking Points Memo reported that, for the duration of the Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton backers James Carville and Paul Begala would no longer be appearing on CNN unless they were paired with a supporter of Barack Obama. The CNN official said Bennett's situation was different since he had given to more than one candidate.

Still, the donations raise serious questions about whether Bennett can act as a neutral analyst in a race that still includes Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul. Following protests of Carville and Begala's role on CNN, the network's political director Sam Feist said, "As we got closer to the voting, we made a decision to make sure that all the analysts that are on are non-aligned."

During the February 3 edition of Reliable Sources, Kurtz reported: "Bill Bennett, the conservative author and CNN contributor, is neutral in the Republican presidential race. The Huffington Post reports that he's given the maximum $4,600 to John McCain. Bennett says he's donated to Mitt Romney as well." The Huffington Post report originally claimed that Bennett had donated $4,600 to McCain, but has since updated its report with the following statement: "Note: Online fundraising databases have conflicting data on the level of William Bennett's contributions to Sen. McCain. A CNN official says that Bennett gave $2300, not $4600, so we are using that number until itemized general election receipts are available from the FEC."

Of Bennett's contributions, Kurtz stated: "It's hardly surprising that obvious partisans would give to candidates, but they should disclose that on the air and let viewers make up their minds." He went on to read from "a statement" he said he had "been given from CNN": "Bill Bennett continues to appear on our political panel because he has not endorsed a presidential candidate and is not advising any one campaign. He has made contributions to both McCain and Romney, but he has stated again and again he does not know who he will vote for." However, despite asserting that Bennett "is neutral in the Republican presidential race," Kurtz did not address the portion of the Huffington Post report that "raise[d] serious questions about whether Bennett can act as a neutral analyst in a race that still includes Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul."

From Kurtz's February 5 Washington Post article:

McCain's strategists have been quietly reaching out to commentators such as Hannity but don't believe the attacks are costing their candidate many votes, noting that McCain won Florida last week even though Limbaugh broadcasts from Palm Beach. But the campaign yesterday released a letter to Limbaugh from Bob Dole, saying McCain has been a loyal Republican on many issues and that "I proudly wore his POW bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the Hanoi Hilton."

Not all right-leaning hosts are climbing aboard the stop-McCain bandwagon. Bill Bennett, the author and former Reagan administration official, who is neutral in the race, has resisted pressure from his listeners to back another candidate.

"In defending McCain on the grounds that he's a very strong conservative on some issues, I got a lot of flak," Bennett said. "I went an hour and 40 minutes before I got one person who was supportive. I have a center-right audience. A lot of it was very unreasonable. ... There are more centers of influence now because the party is fractured."

From the February 3 edition of CNN's Reliable Sources:

KURTZ: I want to deal with this late-breaking story, which was mentioned in The Huffington Post.

Bill Bennett, the conservative author and CNN contributor, is neutral in the Republican presidential race. The Huffington Post reports that he's given the maximum $4,600 to John McCain. Bennett says he's donated to Mitt Romney as well.

It's hardly surprising that obvious partisans would give to candidates, but they should disclose that on the air and let viewers make up their minds. Here's a statement I've been given from CNN.

"Bill Bennett continues to appear on our political panel because he has not endorsed a presidential candidate and is not advising any one campaign. He has made contributions to both McCain and Romney, but he has stated again and again he does not know who he will vote for."

On the Democratic side, two of CNN's top Democratic contributors, James Carville and Paul Begala, obviously support Hillary Clinton and have donated to her campaign as well. CNN decided a couple of months ago to have them only on the air with advocates for other Democratic candidates now -- that would be Barack Obama -- at least until the Democratic race is decided. That change makes sense and is long overdue.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by jeter2 (February 05, 2008 2:20 pm ET)
         

      Oh please just stop the fake concern MMFA. You don't give a hoot about Huckabee or Paul. This is just a lame attempt to go after the much hated [by Dem/Libs] Bill Bennett.

      McCain & Romney are the clear frontrunners, the other two don't stand a chance in hell to get the nomination. Bennett has contributed to both McCain & Romney. That's impartial enough for most everyone but nit-pickers with a phony agenda.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by juliajayne (February 05, 2008 2:47 pm ET)
           

        So Bill Bennet is hated by Dems/libs. Does that mean you like him? Just wondering.

        And MMFA's phony agenda. Please articulate what the phony agenda is. And WIJH? Again, just wondering.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (February 05, 2008 3:54 pm ET)
             

          I think agenda was the wrong word, I should have said the MMFA's laughable pretence of giving a hoot about Huckabee & Paul.

          As far as your other question, while I think Bennett is unquestionably an intelligent man, I wouldn't list him as one of my favorite pundits, or whatever he is defined as these days nor do I agree with him on every issue.

          Sorry but what does WIJH mean?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (February 05, 2008 4:01 pm ET)
               

            Why is Jeter Hysterical?

            Sorry, couldn't help myself. I understand you're a bit tense after all of your Huckabee stumping amounted to nothing. ;0)

            Report Abuse
            • Author by juliajayne (February 05, 2008 4:15 pm ET)
                 

              WIJH? I had something different in mind, but I like your explanation better. Sorry J, you did sound a teensy bit hysterical.  ;-0) But I understand. 

              Do Dems/Libs HATE Bennet? Really? Maybe they just don't think he's terribly "virtuous". 

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Clevenative (February 05, 2008 4:47 pm ET)
                   
                You know how it is juliajayne – if you don’t agree, you hate. Don’t agree with the surge – you hate the troops. Don’t agree with GW – you hate America. There’s no middle ground – “You’re either with us or you’re against us.”

                Report Abuse
                • Author by thomp.steve9098 (February 05, 2008 4:57 pm ET)
                     

                  You know how it is juliajayne – if you don’t agree, you hate. Don’t agree with the surge – you hate the troops. Don’t agree with GW – you hate America. There’s no middle ground – “You’re either with us or you’re against us.”

                  Now you know that mindset plays both ways -- if you want tough immigration laws, you hate Mexicans. If you think affirmative action is wrong and unconstitutional, you're a racist. If don't want socialized healthcare, you don't care about kids.  I'm not saying that you do it, but that outlook applies equally to the far left. 

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by juliajayne (February 05, 2008 5:36 pm ET)
                       
                    Nah, Stevo. It's what most of the far right has to say after they declare their positions that cause them to be labled as the things you list. It's not the positions themselves. 
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by tommy (February 05, 2008 5:49 pm ET)
                         

                      Huh?

                      The point is that those who have principled opposition to unenforced borders, discriminatory affirmative action,  government run health care, and high taxes, for another - are often labeled with the unfair meanings that Steve illustrated. Which is equally as unfair when hung on principled opponents of the war, and so on.

                      Marginalizing opponents for political one-upmanship is practiced ad nauseum by both sides, it's generally called spin. 

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by juliajayne (February 05, 2008 6:24 pm ET)
                           

                        Huh yourself. If the far right would shut up and stop sounding like all the things Stevo articulated maybe they wouldn't be labled. Feigning naivete is pretty laughable. But I know you're invested in blowing your special brand of sunshine up our collective buttocks.  :-0) Sheesh.

                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by tommy (February 05, 2008 6:29 pm ET)
                             

                          "my special brand of sunshine up your collective buttocks"?

                          I don't want to know what that means??, but I prefer to ram my common sense down your collective throats instead.  

                          :) 

                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by T-Hone (February 05, 2008 6:54 pm ET)
                               
                            Kinky!
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by juliajayne (February 05, 2008 7:16 pm ET)
                               
                            If only you had common sense or could grasp a general concept! But we can't all be wide eyed sunshine, lollipops and rainbows my pretend little naif.  ;-0)
                            Report Abuse
                    • Author by thomp.steve9098 (February 06, 2008 8:17 am ET)
                         

                      Nah, Stevo. It's what most of the far right has to say after they declare their positions that cause them to be labled as the things you list. It's not the positions themselves.

                      Okay. I gotta hand it to the loony left. Your brains seem superbly conditioned to justify or entirely ignore your own hypocrisy. It's entertaining though!!

                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by worrierking (February 06, 2008 9:57 am ET)
                       
                    Yes, people here might have accused those people who are so vocal about their opposition to illegal immigrants as racists, but consider the source, an anonymous poster.

                    The difference between what you say and Cleve's post is that the charges of being anti-American have come from the highest officials in the country, not some anonymous poster on a website.

                    Yet, the President of the United States claims that you're either with us or against us.

                    The VP claims that opposition to the war is being against the troops. Every conservative radio host has voiced support of the positions taken by the President and VP.

                    We've been called everything from traitors to cowards by those who themselves were cowards when it was their turn to step up. Cowards like Cheney, Limbaugh and O'Reilly.

                    There is a big difference.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by thomp.steve9098 (February 06, 2008 10:27 am ET)
                         
                      That's seriously a good point. Right now I don't recall any liberal leaders casting the aspersions I referenced above, and am not about to look.
                      Report Abuse
      • Author by seeryer (February 05, 2008 3:10 pm ET)
           
        They are going after the lazy journalism of Howie Kurtz IMO.  How can he call a guy neutral in a race when he has donated the full amount permisible to a candidate?  Because he is a member of the CNN family?  I though Kurtz was supposed to be a reliable source.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by The Stranger (February 05, 2008 6:48 pm ET)
           

        ...ummm....sooo...any Democrat in the media that contributed to Dems cannot comment on politics either?

        OK dokey...everybody go to www.opensecrets.org to find out who in the media contributed to Dems...and then let's kick them off the air

        Dear Cripes, this is funny as sh!t.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by juliajayne (February 05, 2008 7:23 pm ET)
             
          Is fecal material funny? Hmmn. Who knew. 
          Report Abuse
        • Author by funnymanpants (February 05, 2008 7:34 pm ET)
             

          What's funny is that you think Clinton murdered Vince Foster.

          What's funny is you provide links that don't back up you claims. What exactly is your link supposed to show?  

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (February 05, 2008 7:57 pm ET)
               
            His link shows the Home page of Opensecrets. I think strangy's hoping somebody else will figure out his point.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by dangrady (February 05, 2008 4:53 pm ET)
         

      SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

      10 years ago, before we erased the last bearer of sanity on the public airways this was the standard to keep your license to the public airways; today the senior editor of the news department has to make a special announcement after the embarrassing revelation has already been made, and for a character that could hardly be more partisan if he tried.

      Democracy?

      Happy Thoughts;

      Dan Grady

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dazedandconfused26 (February 05, 2008 7:22 pm ET)
         
      This is kind of a non-story. The commentators preference of canidate is always going to show through, it shouldn't matter as long they keep up a modicum of impartiality. Give the guy a break, it's not like he works for fox.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.