Al Gore. Michael Moore. Robert Redford. On Wednesday, the actor/director became the third prominent left-winger to appear on "Good Morning America" this year and berate journalists for not being liberal enough. Redford, in his second GMA interview this week, Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep stopped by to promote "Lions For Lambs," their new anti-war drama. During the interview, co-host Diane Sawyer played a minute-long clip of the movie in which Cruise's character berates a journalist for being a "windsock" to the Bush administration during the Iraq War. The clip featured Cruise haughtily complaining, "Your network led every report about the invasion of Iraq with the digital screen-sized flag to the square-jawed saluting Marine and the bald eagle soaring to Aaron Copland."
Sawyer then sycophantically begged, "Speaking as your resident windsock, what would you have us do? What would this film have us do?" Being a tough journalist, Sawyer then allowed Redford to get away with responding that when "we found out the cause behind the war was a lie, that's when I think everybody should have stood up, wakened up, and moved forward." At no point did the GMA host point out that, in regards to Iraq, Bill Clinton said the same thing about WMDs as President Bush.
As far as Sawyer's claim to be a "windsock," one might ask the question, for who? The GMA co-host was certainly no shill for the Bush administration prior to the war. As noted in the March 17, 2003 edition of the MRC's Notable Quotables, the journalist, at times, gushed over Saddam Hussein:
Diane Sawyer: "I read this morning that he’s also said the love that the Iraqis have for him is so much greater than anything Americans feel for their President because he’s been loved for 35 years, he says, the whole 35 years."
Dan Harris in Baghdad: "He is one to point out quite frequently that he is part of a historical trend in this country of restoring Iraq to its greatness, its historical greatness. He points out frequently that he was elected with a hundred percent margin recently."
– Exchange on ABC’s Good Morning America, March 7.
And this is how the "windsock" for war phrased a question to (then) Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean on September 8 of the same year:
"Last night, do you feel the President began to level with the American people?"
– Diane Sawyer to Democratic candidate Howard Dean on ABC’s Good Morning America on September 8, the morning after President Bush’s speech to the nation.
Cheerfully embracing criticism from prominent liberals has become a trend for "Good Morning America." In June, co-host Chris Cuomo interviewed Michael Moore about Iraq, among other issues. The filmmaker asserted that, because the networks didn't challenge Bush in the run-up to the war, they were "complicit" in the deaths of U.S. soldiers. In June, Al Gore appeared to promote his new book and assert that the media is hypnotizing Americans, much in the way that "you could hypnotize chickens."
In addition to accepting journalistic criticism from the left, Sawyer generally fawned over "Lions For Lambs." She lovingly called it a movie that "really challenges you to examine some of your basic assumptions about life and politics." Sawyer also recited a lament that "someone" said (a cute reference to Streep's Time magazine interview), "We are afraid to speak. We are afraid to speak up. This film is the difficulty of standing up." It sure seems like liberals aren't having a problem in "standing up" and challenging journalists to be even more liberal.
Finally, as if GMA hasn't promoted this propagandistic film enough, Sawyer closed the segment by promising yet another interview, this one exclusively with Meryl Streep, on Thursday. And it should be noted that Redford appeared by himself on Tuesday.
A transcript of the segment, which aired at 8:32am on November 7, follows:
DIANE SAWYER: And coming up right now, Robert Redford, Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, together. They're in a new movie called "Lions for Lambs," which really challenges you to examine some of your basic assumptions about life and politics and it opens on Friday. But we had a chance to sit down, because, of course, not only are they co-workers, they are pals. And the two guys made it clear they thought it was pretty funny when the flawless Meryl Streep, drinking very quickly, seems to have-- well, was that a burp? Are you laughing already at my questions?
ROBERT REDFORD: No, at her belch.
SAWYER: Oh, okay. All right, that's permitted? Was it loud?
MERYL STREEP: Do you have to give away everything?
SAWYER: Okay, "Lions For Lambs." Someone said, "We are afraid to speak. We are afraid to speak up. This film is the difficulty of standing up."
STREEP: I think that, for me, it was about that. What am I willing to do for this war? Am I willing to give a kid? And if I'm not, why am I not speaking about it? Nobody has a stake in this war except for one percent of the population. The people that made it won't ask their own kids to fight in it. And the rest of us are living as if there's no war.
SAWYER: The film is a duel of ideas and challenges. Which side are you on? Including a conversation between a journalist, played by Streep, and a senator, played by Cruise.
["Lions For Lambs clip" begins. 59 seconds long]
TOM CRUISE CHARACTER: When did you all become a windsock?
MERYL STREEP CHARACTER: A what?
TOM CRUISE: Wind sock. Blows with the prevailing breeze. When did you start confusing majority opinion with the right opinion?
STREEP: Sort of like when we supported going into Iraq?
CRUISE: Supported? Oh, no, no, no, no, you guys sold it. Your network led every report about the invasion of Iraq with the digital screen-sized flag to the square-jawed saluting Marine and the bald eagle soaring to Aaron Copland.
STREEP: That's because we believed and you believed Iraq is a legitimate enemy and you asked us for the benefit of the doubt--
CRUISE: They are a legitimate enemy.
STREEP: --because we have troops in harm's way.
CRUISE: And your network provided that benefit without a blush.
STREEP: We gave it to you.
CRUISE: We both, Janine, we both put our fighting men at risk. Now, I've admitted my mistakes. When will you?
["Lions For Lambs clip ends]
SAWYER: Yes, in the film journalists forced to answer too. As you heard in the film, they are called wind socks. Speaking as your resident windsock, what would you have us do?
REDFORD: You know what --
SAWYER: What would this film have us do? Redford says on 9/11, all of us, including journalists, had to rally together. But after that?
REDFORD: At the point we found out that the cause behind the war was a lie, that's when I think everybody should have stood up, wakened up, and moved forward.
STREEP: We're always screaming at the television. And we go on television and we're--
SAWYER: Very polite, except for the burping thing.
STREEP: I didn't burp.
REDFORD: No, a belch.
SAWYER: What have you seen when college kids have seen the film?
REDFORD: The younger the student, it seemed to me, the more energized.
STREEP: My 16-year-old and her friends like the movie, the screening, the best, which I take to be first of all the highest compliment because there is no tougher critic, but also great good hope for interest in talking about stuff.
REDFORD: Yeah, my 16-year-old, grandchild, has had the same reaction.
SAWYER: Suri has had no comment so far?
STREEP: She had a lot of comments on the set though.
SAWYER: She did?
STREEP: Yes.
SAWYER: Does she babble?
STREEP: Yes, over my line.
SAWYER: Daddy's little girl?
TOM CRUISE: She did, a couple times.
SAWYER: Tom Cruise has several roles on this film. He is the studio mogul now who green-lit the project. He's also the star and, he adds, a fan.
CRUISE: You know, I'm here to help the artist do anything I can in any way. I'm the one who's being schooled and learning, and I was always, quietly, like, trying to take a moment when everyone wasn't -- and I'd sit down and go, so, you know, "Out of Africa," how was that -- what was that?
["Out of Africa" clip]
SAWYER: "Out of Africa." It was 22 years ago Redford and Streep worked together. So before they left, we asked the old friends if they would answer some of the random questions posed by the staff. Who of you is more likely to cry at a chick flick?
.......
SAWYER: Again, three powerhouses in a new movie which really does ask some tough and important questions. And it's opening on Friday. By the way, also in the news, of course, Tom Cruise's wife, Katie Holmes recently finished the New York City marathon. We asked about that.
Five hours, 29 minutes, 58 seconds.
CRUISE: Impressive.
REDFORD: Pretty amazing.
SAWYER: Did she take the day off afterwards?
CRUISE: No. She got her heels on and we went to the screening for "Lions for Lambs" and she's right -- you know, mom and working. Impressive. She trained. She inspires me.
SAWYER: And "Lions for Lambs," once more, opens on Friday. And Meryl Streep was sticking around and we had a chance to talk with her about a lot more. That will be coming up later.
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.



STREEP: I think that, for me, it was about that. What am I willing to do for this war? Am I willing to give a kid? And if I'm not, why am I not speaking about it? Nobody has a stake in this war except for one percent of the population. The people that made it won't ask their own kids to fight in it. And the rest of us are living as if there's no war. 












Editor at Large
Comments Policy
we found out the cause behind the war was a lie
November 7, 2007 - 13:47 ET by PShannonThat statement is a lie. Nobody lied.
http://www.freedomsenemies.com/_more/bushliedWMD.htm
The Left keeps on lying
November 7, 2007 - 14:12 ET by mattmIt's all they have... It not merely that the Clintoids said the same thing, it's that there were WMD, they were found, some were known to have been moved out of Iraq or destroyed just prior to the invasion....etc. etc. etc.
Nerve gas at U.N.
I challenge that remark
November 7, 2007 - 15:27 ET by Free ThinkerI challenge that remark everytime someone says it to me and have never have received evidence of a lie. I would love to hear these hollywood types get challenged by the media when they make this baseless accusation. Especially when the news media is being critisized for not challenging what the administration says. Who would you believe, the POTUS or a Hollywood actor with?
ABC/Diane Sawyer,etc.
November 7, 2007 - 13:50 ET by merlin61Windsocks? Puppetsocks more like!!!!
No one in Hollywood will admit that our country
was not the only one to believe that there were
WMD in Iraq. You are right, Dumb Diane wouldnt
dare mention that Bill Clinton also believed Iraq
had WMD. Commie pinkos!!!! Bring back
Archie Bunker.
DARN IT!!
November 7, 2007 - 14:04 ET by sunandsteelI was going to call her a sock puppet but you beat me to it. :-P LOL
Texas has a population of nearly 21 million people, all of whom are ashamed to be from the same state as the Dixie Chicks. (IMAO.us)
Bobby REDford should just change his name to Stalin
November 7, 2007 - 13:55 ET by Lame CherryOld fornicating prima dona liberals are just such bores. They live in the west in luxury while the Mexican beaners mow their lawns and they buy horses while giving support to animal freedom movements.....the dichotomy just goes on.
Bobby Redford should just quit the scam and move to Russia. There are tons of beautiful places there where him and comrade Putin could rape the environment, make propaganda and blame others for all the problems they create.
Never once did jet flying Redford ever conceive that his liberal voting caused the Iraq war as if America used our own untapped supply we would have cheap fuel and be free of terrorists.
I suggest next time Sawyer and the artist formerly known as Redford and now Stalin just put the old windsocks over their heads along with that insane Tom Cruise to set his mind warped wife free. That would be of more benefit to the world instead of fornication, bastards, adultery, divorce and lies.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
...put the old windsocks
November 7, 2007 - 13:59 ET by misterbee241...put the old windsocks over their heads...
I have a better idea where they can put the windsock...
I thought the Sundance Kid
November 7, 2007 - 13:56 ET by misterbee241I thought the Sundance Kid was going to move to Ireland if Bush was elected. Why is he still here living in this miserable country where he's afraid to speak out while raking in bucks for his leftist propaganda?
And he can take those two brain trusts with him too, Streep and Cruise.
These people make my gag reflex work overtime.
It continues to prove what I say
November 7, 2007 - 14:01 ET by tater...they say things about how bad the US is but continue to live and work here. They are hypocrites.
Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns
I don't get it, you guys
November 7, 2007 - 14:10 ET by blingbling65I don't get it, you guys think Bill Clinton is the reincarnation of Satan, a man who lies every time he opens his mouth. But you point to his lies about WMD's as proof we weren't trick into this war.
makes no sense, your crazy logic just goes around is circles.
You're the one using crazy logic.
November 7, 2007 - 14:20 ET by mattmWe're pointing out the hypocrisy of the fact that no one on the Left accused Clinton of lying about WMD, yet they accuse Bush of lying even though he said the same thing. Plus, there were WMD.
Besides, your premise is wrong. We don't claim Clinton lies every time he opens his mouth...just most of the time.... ; )
Now, if you have trouble grasping the obvious, it's no wonder you're a lib. Or maybe you're just pulling everyone's leg...(for your sake I hope that's it)
mattm - complusive is the word.
November 7, 2007 - 15:16 ET by Gary Hallmattm - complusive is the word.
Christopher Hitchens' book, "No One Left to Lie To - The Triangulation of William J Clinton"
... recently made even more credible by comments to Maureen Dowd by former Clinton devotee, Hollywood mogul David Geffen:
Clinton, Edwards, & friends set the record rather straight.
November 7, 2007 - 14:32 ET by Gary HallClinton, Edwards, & friends set the record rather straight. The important thing to note here is the date of these views, and that these statements come from those people who Redford and friends, and Redford and friends in the MSM respect.
This is not about what Bush told congress; the record clearly shows that they all already believed it, and the honcho's of the Clinton administration still believed it long after the Iraq War started. (My bold).
Al Gore on his belief that theWMD's were there, in the Fall of 2002 said - "Absolutely, Absolutley."
July 22, 2003 (Larry King Live)
***Why is it that our media, that worships the views of Bill Clinton, could not find it within themselves to carry his message forward?***
Oct. 10, 2004 (Meet the Press) - EDWARDS: "No, I think Saddam Hussein was a very serious threat. I stand by that, and that's why we stand behind our vote on the resolution."
Feb, 4, 2007 (Meet the Press) - Russert with Edwards - revisiting the same videotape of Edward's comments..
April of 2003 Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen: “I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons [WMD's]...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
'Hardball with Chris Matthews' Nov. 7, 2005
Senator Carl Levin (D) of Michigan, a member of the Intelligence Committee
Really? Why doesn't Redford do a movie on Sen. Carl Levin?
Sounded like another missed
November 7, 2007 - 14:54 ET by BruzillaSounded like another missed opportunity for the MSM to say "Hmmm... WMDs were found in Iraq, just no nuclear weapons. Reports say that the nuclear program was moved to Syria, and Israel recently risked serious sanctions by attacking a heretofore unknown nuclear site in Syria, while not attacking a fairly advanced site in Iran. Could it be that the Iraqi nuclear weapons program was much further along than anyone suspected? Hmmm..."
Myths that make no sense
November 7, 2007 - 14:59 ET by KC MulvilleThe myth is that the Bush administration led a reluctant public into war, distorting intelligence to make Saddam seem like a threat. The media, terrified that the GOP would call them unpatriotic, refused to challenge Bush on his intelligence conclusions. Now, five years later, courageous liberals are braving the harsh accusations to speak truth to power.
Just remember the rule: the purpose of "revealing" a conspiracy is to boast that you were too smart to be fooled by it.
A Wole Lot Of Sense
November 7, 2007 - 15:06 ET by tbbaxterREDFORD: At the point we found out that the cause behind the war was a lie, that's when I think everybody should have stood up, wakened up, and moved forward.
What the hell does that mean??!! This is the problem with celebrities: without a writer to script them, they are utterly incoherent. They live in a fantasy world, so they have no idea what is going on in the real one. They are much better suited to talk about who is shacking up with who. This is exactly why people in Hollywood should stick to making movies and leave the serious stuff to more mature and, shall I say, intelligent people. To quote Lina Lamont in Singing In The Rain: "What do they think I am, dumb or somethin'?"
Yes, we do!
Some advice for those concerned...
November 7, 2007 - 17:19 ET by lotrDon't watch their movies -- they would quit churning out such drivel if it ceased to be profitable. The fact is, liberal propaganda is often sensational, and thus it sells (and also stupifies). Don't buy into it. Stay home and read a good book instead.
Say What?
November 7, 2007 - 15:08 ET by MikeHuWhat planet do these people, like Redford or Sawyer, live on? It certainly isn't "The Earth" as well demonstrated by that quote of dialog from the film. This film is crap. It is so full of crap that it has to (in tried and true lefty fashion) construct straw men and straw policies to attack. And I don't think I need to actually see the film to know it is crap (just like I don't need to actually go to the moon to know it's inhospitable for life), when all I have to do is read the reviews at rottentomatoes.com (a true eye-opening experience, as you can see the clearly liberal reviewers just aching to give it good reviews, but it is apparently such a didactic boring craptacular that evcn some of them can't manage to do it).
I want to know - are the filmmakers saying we shouldn't be in Afghanistan because - gosh - American lives are being lost and what is it all good for? I mean - Afghanistan, home of the Al Qaeda loving taliban weasels and jihadists who carried out the 9/11 attacks! That Afghanistan? The one with the NATO commitment? And they have to concoct a phony American Afghanistan military policy to criticize as if that has anything to do with real life?
"This film is (about?) the difficulty of standing up????" Again, what planet are these idiots on? Well, I guess we know who the real "Lambs" are - Baaa.
"craptacular"
November 7, 2007 - 15:24 ET by MightyMouthLOL! Thanks Mike, yet another word I can add to my lexicon describing liberal actions.
"Thank you Democrats, that tax hike was craptacular, may we have another?"
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...