Bush v. the media
I can’t stand the conservative cry babies who keep saying that the media is being bias against them.
First of all, I absolutely adore Helen Thomas. She has covered something like nine administrations. I saw her at the Newseum when it opened in D.C. in 1997 as she was being interviewed and she is quite something.
I think she is more of a liberal than a conservative, which is what she is now being blasted for, but in a recent interview she said that her reporting is only about “finding the truth” which is what it should be, right???
For some of you who are not following the line of Bush backpeddlings, last week he told an audience in Ohio that he never linked the September 11th attacks with Saddam Hussein as a reason for going to war. His comments were linked with old sound bytes from 2003 on shows like Keith Oberman which showed the direct contradiction of his statements for why we went to war with Iraq.
I don’t understand why people keep buying his lies. He can’t even string a sentence together anymore when he is trying to explain his reasons for things.
For the past 6 years, he has avoided calling on Helen Thomas like the plague. He knows she will try to corner him. Last week, he had a moment of weakness and called on her.
The following is the exchange:
Helen. After that brilliant performance at the Gridiron (dinner), I am -- (laughter.)
Q You're going to be sorry. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then, let me take it back. (Laughter.)
Q I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?
THE PRESIDENT: I think your premise -- in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- is that -- I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect --
Q Everything --
THE PRESIDENT: Hold on for a second, please.
Q -- everything I've heard --
THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me, excuse me. No President wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We -- when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.
Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second --
Q They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.
THE PRESIDENT: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained --
Q I'm talking about Iraq --
THE PRESIDENT: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.
I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences --
Q -- go to war --
THE PRESIDENT: -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: You're welcome. (Laughter.) I didn't really regret it. I kind of semi-regretted it. (Laughter.)
Q -- have a debate.
THE PRESIDENT: That's right. Anyway, your performance at the Gridiron was just brilliant -- unlike Holland's, was a little weak, but -- (laughter.)
Sorry.
What?
And after this confusing exchange, Helen Thomas has to go on MSNBC to explain herself for asking an “unpatriotic” question. What the hell is that about?
What about, answer the damn question Mr. President, in a way that makes some rational sense to people who speak and understand clear sentences.
Isn’t it true that “If you were telling the truth, it would only take 2 seconds” (Randi Rhodes 3/28/05) It takes George W. 5 minutes of incredible rambling to try to get a statement across. Telling, isn’t it?
This whole b.s. about the media’s war on the Bush administration should make Americans think a little. If the media is now being “biased,” “unpatriotic” and “unfair” isn’t there some thought that it might be investigative and doing it’s job at trying to bring the American people “THE NEWS” and not just “pro-war propaganda.”
Bush has said “In my line of work you have to repeat yourself over and over again to get the truth across…to catapult the propaganda.”
Message:
The Bush administration is into propaganda.
The media is into reporting.
That damn media is just so unpatriotic by not reporting the propaganda.
I’m just so flabbergasted that we continue to let this happen.
This is a reflection of history when during World War II this statement was an observation of the governmental reactions in countries like, cough, Nazi Germany: “you tell people about a threat, something to fear, then you call them traitors when they question it.” Something like that.
This entire war and administration is bullshit. Our grandchildren will be learning about this in history class and we will be embarrassed and apologetic for ever letting it happen.
I think the media should keep pushing, keep reporting, keep searching for the truth. The TRUTH!!!! And I think we, as Americans, have a duty to seek the truth as well. God help us if we ever stop seeking the truth.
First of all, I absolutely adore Helen Thomas. She has covered something like nine administrations. I saw her at the Newseum when it opened in D.C. in 1997 as she was being interviewed and she is quite something.
I think she is more of a liberal than a conservative, which is what she is now being blasted for, but in a recent interview she said that her reporting is only about “finding the truth” which is what it should be, right???
For some of you who are not following the line of Bush backpeddlings, last week he told an audience in Ohio that he never linked the September 11th attacks with Saddam Hussein as a reason for going to war. His comments were linked with old sound bytes from 2003 on shows like Keith Oberman which showed the direct contradiction of his statements for why we went to war with Iraq.
I don’t understand why people keep buying his lies. He can’t even string a sentence together anymore when he is trying to explain his reasons for things.
For the past 6 years, he has avoided calling on Helen Thomas like the plague. He knows she will try to corner him. Last week, he had a moment of weakness and called on her.
The following is the exchange:
Helen. After that brilliant performance at the Gridiron (dinner), I am -- (laughter.)
Q You're going to be sorry. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then, let me take it back. (Laughter.)
Q I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?
THE PRESIDENT: I think your premise -- in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- is that -- I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect --
Q Everything --
THE PRESIDENT: Hold on for a second, please.
Q -- everything I've heard --
THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me, excuse me. No President wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We -- when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.
Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second --
Q They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.
THE PRESIDENT: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained --
Q I'm talking about Iraq --
THE PRESIDENT: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.
I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences --
Q -- go to war --
THE PRESIDENT: -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: You're welcome. (Laughter.) I didn't really regret it. I kind of semi-regretted it. (Laughter.)
Q -- have a debate.
THE PRESIDENT: That's right. Anyway, your performance at the Gridiron was just brilliant -- unlike Holland's, was a little weak, but -- (laughter.)
Sorry.
What?
And after this confusing exchange, Helen Thomas has to go on MSNBC to explain herself for asking an “unpatriotic” question. What the hell is that about?
What about, answer the damn question Mr. President, in a way that makes some rational sense to people who speak and understand clear sentences.
Isn’t it true that “If you were telling the truth, it would only take 2 seconds” (Randi Rhodes 3/28/05) It takes George W. 5 minutes of incredible rambling to try to get a statement across. Telling, isn’t it?
This whole b.s. about the media’s war on the Bush administration should make Americans think a little. If the media is now being “biased,” “unpatriotic” and “unfair” isn’t there some thought that it might be investigative and doing it’s job at trying to bring the American people “THE NEWS” and not just “pro-war propaganda.”
Bush has said “In my line of work you have to repeat yourself over and over again to get the truth across…to catapult the propaganda.”
Message:
The Bush administration is into propaganda.
The media is into reporting.
That damn media is just so unpatriotic by not reporting the propaganda.
I’m just so flabbergasted that we continue to let this happen.
This is a reflection of history when during World War II this statement was an observation of the governmental reactions in countries like, cough, Nazi Germany: “you tell people about a threat, something to fear, then you call them traitors when they question it.” Something like that.
This entire war and administration is bullshit. Our grandchildren will be learning about this in history class and we will be embarrassed and apologetic for ever letting it happen.
I think the media should keep pushing, keep reporting, keep searching for the truth. The TRUTH!!!! And I think we, as Americans, have a duty to seek the truth as well. God help us if we ever stop seeking the truth.
posted by Holly | 11:17 AM
2 Comments:
themagoopolitic,
It is interesting that in defending the media, you cite Helen Thomas as doing a great job of seeking the truth.
One of the many problems with people in the media today is that reporters often distract from the the subject they are covering, because their own actions cause them to become a story in itself.
Helen Thomas is a classic case in point. She has publicly stated that if VP Cheney ran for president "she would kill herself", and that Pres Bush is "the worst President ever". She did not say these things to her friends in a private setting, but in open forums, where the remarks were later published in newspapers.
Helen Thomas is a reporter whose beat is the White House, and yet she compromised her ability to cover that beat by allowing her antagonistic views to be so well known.
Do you blame the President or anyone else for not calling on her? In truth, King Features Syndicate (Thomas works for them) would do its readers a service by dumping Thomas and getting a reporter whose bias against the administration wasn't an open book. Maybe that reporter would get his/her questions answered on better than an annual basis.
You published the transcript and said it was a muddled answer, too. However, if you actually watch a recording of the segment, the President comes across pretty well.
And as a side note, there ARE a great deal of problems with the media and reporting these days, and as a blogger you should be concerned. In one week alone, the New York Times made two very large mistakes in its reporting (profiled the wrong guy in the hood from Abu Ghraib, and a fraudulent Katrina victim). The media also UNDER reported the post election violence in Belarus last week as well.
And even if you don't agree with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, if you are forming your worldview by what you read in papers and see on television, it is really difficult to understand what is going on. Having served in the latter country, I do not feel the reporting on that conflict while I was there resembled the ground truth of what I was experiencing.
And why bother qoting an Air America host to emphasize a negative point on the Bush Administration? Air America practically exists to harangue the administration at every turn. If the republicans lost control of the White House and Congress, Air America would probably lose half of its advertisers.
It would be better to find some outlets that provide a little more balanced reporting, actually. For example, if you were making a point against Nancy Pelosi and were working off of a bunch of Bill O'Reilly quotes, would they have the same impact as a more balanced outlet?
I would recommend you turn the dial in your car up up or down a few KHz(like say to NPR or something) every once and a while and try to balance yourself out, otherwise you will end up in a cocoon like those republicans you spend your time criticizing here on this page.
You can make this blog out to be anything you want, TMP, so if you don't feel like listening to what your readers suggest in these comments, more power to you. But if you want this little place you are carving out of the internet to be an emotional based illogical screed, then it's going to end up exactly like a million other sites on the net. Just a thought.
I am looking forward to the day you check out the Wilsonizer and leave a few critical comments there, too!
Bob W.
The Wilsonizer
Themagoo,
Thou art slowing down on thy posting, eh?!
Post a Comment
<< Home