Bozell on Fox: Media Tarring Santorum As Extremist On Abortion But Ignored Obama's Extremism
When Democrats have primary presidential contests, we never hear about "extreme-left, in-your-face liberals," playing to the left-wing base of their party, yet when it comes to this year Republican primary contest, the media are quick to slather the extreme-right label on candidates like Rick Santorum, NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell noted on the January 6 edition of Fox News Channel's Hannity.
"ABC believes that if you support the traditional family as Rick Santorum does, that makes you in-your-face. CNN believes that it makes you extreme," Bozell complained, arguing that President Obama has the "most radical pro-abortion record in the history of the presidency of the United States" but was never called on it as a liability when facing the American electorate [video embedded below the page break]
"How's this for a number: 1,289 network news stories on Barack Obama in 2008, only six ever mentioned his position on the Born Alive Bill, which is a bill to save the life of a baby that survives a partial-birth abortion and he stopped even that.... No one ever called that extreme," Bozell noted of the media four years ago.
Also discussed on last night's "Media Mash" segment was how the media, particularly NBC, have slammed Iowans as too conservative.
- NB Staff's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Born-alive part 2
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 1:39pm.
I mentioned this issue in a comment yesterday.
The problem is that it's up to the CANDIDATES to inform people of the facts when the issue of abortion is brought up.
Of course the media avoided discussing Obama's votes in Illinois and his convoluted explanations and rationalizations while allowing him to assure people who opposed them that he wanted abortions to be as few as possible.
McCain wouldn't press the issue ... or any issue that might have helped in 2008.
Will anyone now?
True, candidates need to
Submitted by Ken Shepherd on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 1:43pm.
True, candidates need to aggressively address their opponents' negatives. But the media also play a role in vetting candidates. The media did jack to vet Obama in 2007-8, whereas now they're digging up all the dirt they can on every candidate out there, save perhaps Huntsman.
I agree, Mr. Shepherd, and
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 2:05pm.
I agree, Mr. Shepherd, and it's time the candidates to realize they will never get an even break from the media in that regard and act accordingly.
If you recall, Tim Russert was excoriated for daring to press Hillary Clinton too "aggressively" on the illegals drivers license issue (as I recall) and George Stephanopolous (after 'supposedly' learning about Bill Ayers from Hannity) was almost drummed out of the media for asking Obama a single softball question on his connection with Ayers.
If no one running for office will mention this double standard again and again at the appropriate moment to shame the media on their turf it will continue unabated.
Instead, they think by being polite and friendly they'll get more favorable coverage ... like McCain did BEFORE he was nominated and AFTER he was defeated.
*Fixed
Submitted by loxmyth on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 1:02pm.
True, candidates need to aggressively address their opponents' negatives. But the media also play a role in vetting candidates. The media did jack to vet Obama in 2007-8 and 2011-12, whereas now they're digging up all the dirt they can on every Republican candidate out there, save perhaps Huntsman.
They still not digging any dirt on Obama...even the stuff right on the top they don't have to actually dig for.
Guess that maybe baby-killin'
Submitted by ray johnson on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 1:42pm.
Guess that maybe baby-killin' is moderate and mainstream to the lsm - like we all didn't know...
Is it now "extreme" to
Submitted by rbosque on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 1:47pm.
Is it now "extreme" to cherish life? Only a world without God thinks that.
Thats always been my
Submitted by Sude23 on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 4:10pm.
Thats always been my argument. How can people so aggressively defend abortion and dehumanize a life but we are the bad guys for trying to make sure that baby has a life. God forbid the fact you couldn't close your legs or wear protection, life has rewards as well as consequences and thats what happens when you choose, own up to it don't make the baby suffer because YOU think it is a bad decision. Blah this probably doesn't even make sense...
now now the libs do cherish
Submitted by TruthMonger on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 4:31pm.
now now the libs do cherish life too - for death row inmates
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
Media Bashing
Submitted by NVRAT on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 5:52pm.
CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CBS are all a bunch of bigots, racists, homophobes, cool aid drinkers, pecker puffers, left wing extremists, lairs, incompetent journalists and the list goes on and on. That`s why I do not watch any of them. I don`t want to contaminate my TV.
Bozell Summary of the"Snow Storm" against Santorum
Submitted by wiley cat on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 7:42pm.
Bingo! Hooray! Hallelujah! We (those of us who kind of like the truth, and who kind of like the Bill of Rights) have our man and can now focus on one candidate, who has helpfully been given great exposure and acknowledgement, to the effect that their hysteria is proof that the capabilities of this man are considered fatally effective against the currently in-process plan to destroy the legal and societal foundations of this formerly flourishing society, which has been based on the value and creative genius of the unique individual citizens, with the amazing opportunities for them to be involved and contribute to the growth and relative safety of the their circumstances, due to the legal guarantees of protections and freedoms enacted for the protection of every individual citizen. Our man understands this system and has the understanding and traits needed to maintain and improve our guarantees of personal liberty and protection.
The opposition (including the blind support of a large segment of the supposedly "fact-based?", "public-oriented?" news organizations) which he (the successful Republican candidate) will be facing, and of which he will be required to stand against, are even now imbedding laws, rules and regulations showing the virulent and copious diseases of unbridled governmental power and dictatorial social-engineering being inflicted on the average, responsible, and capable citizens of this country
These rules and regulations currently being and scheduled to be, implemented, with few exceptions, are directly aimed at producing a subservient, defenseless, and "civil-rights"-less pot of nameless serfs to be used to further expand and intensify the ability of the government to extract every last bit of servitude in the jealous pursuit of ever-greater wealth, power and control. Some of these rules and regulations are being enforced even though they have not been enacted or approved in accordance with the Constitution, and have been put into place in gross contempt of the legal requirements for approving and enabling laws having the force of Federal Law.
Is that really the direction we want to be going? If the current appointed and installed Democrats and supporters have their way, that is where we will be going. For one thing, we as "the loyal opposition" will have to learn to evaluate at length every claim and charge leveled by the large media outlets. Reason: One of the tenets of the radical socialist activists now in effective charge is that the creation of confusion and use of misdirection is a primary activity to be used to avoid having to answer to the media for their own activities.
I do believe that the man who was able to elicit such enthusiastic and effusive attacks against him, ex-senator Santorum, is the man in this race who will respond carefully and effectively and honestly to the challenges which must be met for this government and the country it represents, with a record for standing up for what must be retained and maintained, in order for this to remain the "land of the free and the home of the brave". Thanks again to the "national" "news?" organizations for exposing of our man's name,for the ferocious reactions and broad exposure.
Because of the fact that implementation of a Presidential-controlled Administrative Rules, Laws and Policy decision-implementation for enforcement, it is likely that this type of hysterically-leaning coverage and misdirection will continue. Those of us who would like for our country to go in the other direction must come together in a united understanding and will to understand and stand for the the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Without God there is no "Justice". With God there is no "Social"(...Class as a political entity.).
MSM on Abortion vs Carter and the Dalai Lama
Submitted by Gary Hall on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 10:04pm.
The national MSM would definitely equate the respective views on abortion of both former President Jimmy Carter and the Dalai Lama, as extremist and/or intolerant, but they don't say anything, because they like them, otherwise.
It's all about politics and the radical agenda of the national MSM - nothing more.
They are a bunch of radical kooks who are intolerant of other's heart felt beliefs.
(;~/ gary
Obama's Support for the Most Heinous Abortions
Submitted by Retired Geek on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 10:37pm.
What exactly is the difference between murdering a child and allowing a child who has lived through an abortion attempt, is breathing on it's own and separated from the birth mother, to die of shock, thirst and starvation in excruciating pain, screaming and sobbing in terror for help?
Two questions that Every American Citizen should ask themselves:
'When exactly does a baby alive and breathing on its own and separated from its birth Mother become an American Citizen?'
When does a baby born in America have Constitutional 'Rights and Protections' guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights - especially the 'Right to Life'?
http://thpatriots.blogspot.com/2012/01/retired-geek-obamas-presidency.html
Media Not Worthy of the Name
Submitted by Netstatter on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 11:14am.
It's so obvious. The MSM is not doing its job and is not worthy of being equated with the noble idea of a Free Press. In fact, the MSM is abusing its power and purpose.
A free press was considered so important to the survival of a free society that Freedom of The Press is listed among the Bill of Rights. I maintain that it is the MSM's duty and calling to report without bias all sides of a story. It is their duty and obligation to vet political candidates and dig for the facts, and report (not "interpret") the news as best they can, so that We the People can be as well informed as we can be. The American People can then vote for the person who we believe is best suited for the office. The MSM did not do their job in 2008, not digging very deeply at all into Obama's past or into his associations with characters like Bill Ayers. As a consequence we have the situation we are in today, with a President who is inept, naive and arrogant, someone who is trying to push ideas and laws on this country that don't work and who is following a foreign policy that will leave this world a much more dangerous place for us and our children.
This country at this time desperately needs a truly Free Press, which will give the American People ALL the facts and which will avoid spin and bias like the plague. We HAVE to start holding the MSM accountable and start calling them out, each an every one of us.
Don't forget Bill O'Reilly!
Submitted by Fredy on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 12:43pm.
Bill opened up the charge with a demand from Santorum to explain why he wants all states to ban contraceptives!
I am still trying to figure out what Bill, and others, are even trying to do with this line of questioning. From the answer Santorum gave Bill, he did not know either.
My best guess is that some propagandists tooks words out of context, and decided to make as much noise as possible. Then the various media arms, many of which NEVER do any actual research, push the distortion forward.
John King was talking about what Dems think of Santorum, not CNN
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 4:02am.
Brent Bozell quoted John King of CNN out of context on Fox News 'Hannity' in the MRC TV video in this article when he quoted John King asking Rick Santorum a question in a CNN interview specifically referring to what "A lot of Democrats" think (not himself or CNN) saying "in their view, you're on the extreme right on many of these social issues" and then Bozell went on to say "CNN believes it makes you extreme."
Here is the CNN transcript with the exact words in the video above that John King said where his question to Rick Santorum was very clearly a reference to what "A lot of Democrats" think about Santorum and not to what John King or CNN think about him:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1201/04/jkusa.01.html
JOHN KING, USA
Republican Race Shifts to New Hampshire; Interview With Republican Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum
Aired January 4, 2012 - 18:00 ET
JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: "A lot of Democrats were celebrating, if you will, Senator Santorum, last night, saying, in their view, you're on the extreme right on many of these social issues and they think, for them, it's a good thing that these issues will be front and center."
Brent Bozell said after this quote "Sean Hannity, look we heard it right here, ABC believes that if you support the traditional family as Rick Santorum does, then it makes you in your face. CNN believes it makes you extreme." Bozell then went on to say to Sean Hannity "can you name me a single time you ever heard CNN or ABC ever call Barack Obama's position extreme" which Hannity answered "No."
Everybody is human and can always make an honest mistake regardless of how smart that they are and even if they have the best of intentions.
Mitch Dworkin, M.Ed.
Dallas, Texas