"I'm a Dan Man myself, so I tend to look at this from his viewpoints [sic]." -- WaPo media critic Tom Shales, on today's "Morning Joe."
It's a morning for candor on "Morning Joe." Earlier, Mika "Bubbles" Brzezinski had admitted that "the SATs were not my strong suit." Later in the show, the notoriously tough-on-conservatives [see, e.g., MRC item #3 here] Tom Shales acknowledged that he has a soft spot for Dan Rather, calling himself a "Dan Man."
I'll say. Despite the overwhelming mountain of uncontroverted and incontrovertible evidence, Shales refuses to admit the obvious: that the documents at the heart of Memogate were the most transparent [literally] and amateurish of forgeries.
Substitute anchor Willie Geist interviewed Shales at 8:30 A.M. EDT this morning.
The time I spent worrying about my segment on “The Daily Show” (filmed last month) was wasted. Yeah, I sound a little silly (hated my voice, liked my hair, but my face looked fat - this photo I like…but not because of the way I look…OK, moving on), and the editor sliced and diced sound bites. But overall, it’s much better than I expected. (And my expectations were quite low.) Whew!
I got a bunch of nastygrams this morning from - you guessed it - white liberals. They wrote the sort of things I know they wouldn’t say to my face.
Another episode of "NewsBusted" has arrived! Topics in this episode: Telemarketers, Al Sharpton, Tom Cruise, David Souter, and more.
If you like the show, spread the word by telling your friends and favorite bloggers about it. We can always use positive comments and ratings on YouTube as well since liberals love to trash anything that isn't politically correct. Note: To be automatically notified by email whenever we post new shows, click this link.
Regular readers of this space know that MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski is one of our favorites, serving up heaps of grist for our mill with her regular injections of liberal opinion into her newsreading on "Morning Joe," as here.
We'd been searching for an apt nickname for Brzezinski, and as of this morning, Mika herself has supplied one. Meet "Bubbles" Brzezinski. Mika was reading headlines from the morning's crop of newspapers, when she came across an item from the Boston Globe.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Boston Globe: "Many colleges ignore SAT writing test." I find this very interesting because SATs were not my strong suit. I probably would never have been allowed to go to college if it was based on just my SAT scores. But apparently hundreds of universities, including several top schools, are ignoring or paying little heed to students' scores on the writing section of the SAT in admissions. I never had a writing section, just bubbles.
A popular San Francisco news anchor inexplicably made a joke on a Wednesday evening newscast suggesting NASCAR superstar Dale Earnhardt Jr. “should marry his stepmother.”
First, some background: Preceding the quip by KPIX news anchor Dana King was a flawed report from sports anchor Dennis O’Donnell about the unveiling of the stock car Dale Earnhardt Jr. will be racing with his new team next season. Dale Jr., son of the late NASCAR legend Dale Earnhardt Sr., is in his final season with Dale Earnhardt Inc., the racing team his father founded and left to Dale Jr.’s stepmother, Teresa Earnhardt. Dale Jr. and Teresa have been publicly at odds about the direction and management of DEI.
Dale Earnhardt Jr. is NASCAR’s most popular driver, and his millions of fans have purchased merchandise emblazoned with his #8, which is the property of DEI. Negotiations with Teresa to allow Dale Jr. to race under #8 on his new team broke down, forcing him to choose a new number. 88 is the number he selected (he purchased the right to use the number from another driver).
In a story on Dan Rather's lawsuit against CBS, Rich Noyes, Research Director at the MRC and Senior Editor of NewsBusters, got two soundbites Wednesday night on the 11pm news on WUSA-TV, channel 9 (ch 34 DT), the Gannett-owned CBS affiliate in Washington, DC. Reporter Gary Nurenberg traveled to the MRC's offices to tape Noyes at about 6:30pm. In Nurenberg's story, Noyes blasted Rather:
This is a story attacking President Bush at the height of a campaign that they raced onto the airwaves. And now Dan Rather's complaining that the investigation was biased and he's the victim in all of this. He is not the victim. He's the perpetrator.
After Nurenberg noted how “the conservative Media Research Center has criticized Rather for years,” viewers heard from Noyes again: “His undoing was his own reporting.”
Wednesday night, Katie Couric read this short item on the "CBS Evening News:"
Dan Rather filed a $70 million lawsuit today against CBS. He accuses the network of making him a quote, “scapegoat” for a discredited story about President Bush's National Guard service. In a statement today, CBS said Rather's “complaints are old news” and his “lawsuit is without merit.”
On ABC's "World News," anchor Charles Gibson allocated about the same amount of time to the lawsuit, but Gibson gave a glimpse of Rather's paranoia, pointing out how “he accuses the network of punishing him to pacify the White House.” Ron Allen included that claim in a full story on Wednesday's "NBC Nightly News."
Related: Tim Graham's earlier item, “Rather Warned Us Years Ago: Some Americans 'Sue at the Drop of a Hat,'” with video.
With “Straight Talk” on screen, ABC's World News led Wednesday night by touting as momentous the news that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in a quote cited in the middle of a newspaper column, said “I don't know” when asked whether invading Iraq was a good idea. “Three little words,” a delighted Charles Gibson announced about dissension in the ranks, “three little words that you rarely hear from the Bush administration when it comes to the war in Iraq: 'I don't know.' That's what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said when asked if the Iraq invasion was a good idea. Gates' words are in stark contrast to the surety often expressed by the President.” Reporter Jonathan Karl trumpeted how “Gates' stunningly candid answer came in an interview with New York Times columnist David Brooks.” Repeating the “I don't know” reply, Karl urged: “Compare that to the words of President Bush, who has said consistently and forcefully the invasion was the right thing to do.” Viewers then saw three Bush soundbites. Karl concluded with how Gates disagrees with Bush “on what might just be the most important question of the Bush presidency.”
ABC seems to apply the approving “straight talk” label to those expressing the media's consensus liberal view.
He's baack! Steve Skvara, the man who won the hearts and minds of many in the mainstream media by essentially calling for other people to pay for his wife's health insurance will soon be on Oprah Winfrey's talk show.
On August 28, radio talk show host Ed Schultz, who has proclaimed that he became "converted" from conservative to liberal while eating a baloney sandwich with his future wife in a Salvation Army cafeteria, loudly issued a challenge to all conservative radio hosts to debate him. Since his show that day was simulcast by C-SPAN, the Big Eddy Challenge can be both seen and heard at almost 20 minutes into the third hour of his show:
...We'll stand up to any conservative talker anywhere in America who wants to have the guts to go head to head with me on your radio show, on your TV show, you conservatives, you're absolutely a bunch of damn liars and we're right back on the Ed Schultz show.
A new study that will appear in Thursday's journal Nature revealed that methane being released from bogs in what is now Great Britain likely contributed to global warming 55 million years ago.
Maybe more importantly, when you add up the methane being released from wetlands around the world, it could completely counteract all the carbon dioxide emissions reductions mandated by the Kyoto Protocol.
Of course, such findings are likely not going to be entered into the current climate change debate, for media will totally ignore this study as they do all reports that go counter to the global warming agenda.
Regardless, as reported by National Geographic Wednesday (emphasis added throughout):
Not once but twice, Chris Matthews today accused Hillary Clinton of "pimping" for having staged a fundraiser that brought together high-rolling homeland-security lobbyists and the congressmen with power over their pet interests.
Matthews leveled the charge on this afternoon's "Hardball" in the course of an interview with David Bonior, John Edwards's campaign manager. The Edwards campaign, in an email from campaign advisor Joe Trippi, has swiped hard at Hillary over the fundraiser, calling it "corrupt."
This seems destined to be ignored by today's climate change obsessed media: Scientists from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies - the very organization now presaging gloom and doom at the hands of global warming - predicted a new ice age back in 1971.
Think this will be a focus of tonight's evening news broadcasts?
Regardless of the answer, the Washington Times wonderfully reported Wednesday (emphasis added throughout, h/t Marc Morano):
Environmental activist and An Inconvenient Truth producer Laurie David received a very warm welcome, from the green-friendly anchors on the Wednesday "Today" show, when she came on to promote her children's book, A Down-To-Earth Guide to Global Warming. During David's interview NBC's Natalie Morales noted that the book's publisher, Scholastic, was trying to place the book into schools everywhere and proclaimed: "We hope to see it there." Morales even bragged that her own son was already being indoctrinated: "They're already talking and learning about this in school. I mean, my own son already knows, 'Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.' You know the three 'R's."
No slouch herself, when it comes to preaching about global warming, Morales' colleague Ann Curry also proudly showed off her own son's concern about climate change in the following tease for the segment:
Dan Rather (file photo from Memogate days) is now suing his former employer for a cool $70 million. Jacques Steinberg of the New York Times has more.
Although it's impossible to sue the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy itself, Rather makes clear conservative groups and bloggers are to blame for his allegedly unfair dismissal from the former Tiffany Network:
When the left-wing media wants something, the Constitution apparently becomes irrelevant. Take the latest attempt by Congress to give congressional representation to the District of Columbia, which fell three votes short of moving to a full Senate vote Tuesday.
Check the establishment media, and you'll have no trouble finding stories decrying the plight of the taxed, but unrepresented, citizens of the District and touting the importance of giving these poor (mostly Democratic) souls representation. Finding stories raising the question of whether or not it's constitutional to do so is another matter.
Dan Rather’s lawsuit against CBS should be dismissed, both in court and in public opinion, as a shameless and ridiculous effort to retract his on-air apologies for his smearing of President Bush with bogus National Guard documents in 2004. The New York Times reports Rather is suing CBS for what he claims is the network’s "‘biased’ and incomplete investigation of the flawed Guard broadcast." That’s rich, since it was Rather’s reporting itself that was biased and incomplete.
Dan Rather didn’t always have this rosy view of big-money litigation. See the CBS Evening News from March 14, 1996: "In tonight's Eye on America, a look beyond the heat to try to shed some light on a growing national problem: Americans who – some of them – will sue at the drop of a hat."
On Sunday, law professor Jeffrey Rosen reviewed for the New York Times the new book "Until Proven Innocent -- Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case," by Stuart Taylor & KC Johnson, which, among bringing other injustices surrounding the case to light, also excoriates the mainstream press's shoddy coverage, much of which presumed the guilt of the three white lacrosse players.
Rosen called the book "riveting," but devoted just two sentences to the frequent passages that rip apart the Times's shoddy coverage of the case, taking particular aim at reporter Duff Wilson and columnist Selena Roberts.