September 8, 2006In the News Gang-up this week, besides the always gracious Diane were: Tod Lindberg, editor of "Policy Review" and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution; E.J. Dionne, senior fellow at The Brookings Institution, Washington Post columnist, and author of "Stand Up Fight Back."; David Ignatius, Washington Post columnist and co-moderator (with Fareed Zakaria) of an online forum on international affairs at washingtonpost.com called "PostGlobal."
What you did not hear today:
Well, in the usual introduction before the show, sort of like an agenda of what will be discussed, there was no mention again of the Valerie Plame non-scandal or "Plame-out". I guess the topic will be filed by the liberal media in the "Oops! Who, me?" archives. Sorry, Mr. Rove, Mr. Libby no apologies for you. After all we in the media only meant well..you know the guardians of democracy.
But there was another non-topic: the real scandal of the media nomenklatura and Hollywoodgentsia's silence before the onslaught of censorship by the Democratic Party machinery against a little docudrama about 9/11 by ABC. Apparently it threatens the already obviously flimsy Clinton legacy. No one in the media or in the artistic community has come out in the defense of the writer, or ABC or freedom of speech. No one in the media has come out in defense of one of their colleagues. A political party uses the power of Congress to ask a network to "pull out" as Sen. Reid has said "a work of fiction" and nobody in the liberal writer's community says anything?
Acting like someone he admires, President Clinton, has unleashed the full force of his stormtroopers or better yet "turbas divinas" (divine mobs as in the Sandinistas) against ABC. Thus, we have renamed him Fidel Clinton. No serious mention whatsoever today of this real scandal of suppression of speech on the Diane Rehm Show.
Under marching orders of Fidel Clinton, The Democratic Party Ministry of Culture and Propaganda, headed by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and assisted by Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, Senator Debbie Stabenow, Senator Charles Schumer and Senator Byron Dorgan, has sent a threatening letter to ABC which intimates that their license could be in jeopardy once their hope for and almost guaranteed return to power takes place.
Just about every apparatchik of the Stalinist Clinton establishment have come out en masse after receiving their marching orders from the Democrat Caudillo. Of course, it is right to defame and destroy the reputation of Scooter Libby and Karl Rove, President Bush and Vicepresident Chenney but you portray Fidel Clinton as he is and whoaaaah!, the towers of his flimsy legacy are in instant danger of being brought down.
A caller tells Diane that he is outraged not by all this but by the fact the media is not hard enough on Bush! According to this "caller" reporters are not doing their job, then as an example that some are, Diane asked the caller if he heard her interview the day before of David Corn and Michael Isikoff.
Veeeery interesting as they would say in the KGB, that the thrust of that appearance was Mr. Bush's intelligence failure during 9 months in office and not the previous two terms of Mr. Clinton during which the same intelligence was developed.
But these two exemplars of reporting are unique. Mr. Isikoff alone is responsible for the deaths of many people in riots provoked due to his false claim about the abuse of the Koran by US troops. And Mr. Corn is the Ann Coulter of the left. I'm waiting for the book "The Lies of David Corn". Shouldn't they be there apologizing and eating crow for their defamation of innocent people in the Valerie Plame non-scandal? What were these gentlemen really doing there, trying to preempt ABC's damaging upcoming series?
Regime change in Iraq was the policy of the Clinton administration. Really, Mr. Corn isn't "the central point" of your campaign that the only thing you have is a matter of proving intentions and motives? You are bent to prove something you can't, that President Bush had all along the evil intention of war with Iraq. Isn't that the case? "There seem to be something particular about Saddam Hussein that got under the president's skin", said David Corn.
When Mr. Isikoff says, "the reason is Saddam's attempt to kill his father" DianeRehm responded, "you don't go to war because of a personal thing?"
The only thing certain that Mr. Corn said all morning is that "this book is a narrative" as such not one "about what went on." And this is what passes today for journalism?
Somewhat caught in the embarrassing slip of Mr. Corn, Mr. Isikoff then allows room for the fact that people around the President may have "pulled" the intelligence to bolster their conclusions, but not David Corn, he insists that the president lied even though he has nothing to prove it with. Either way, they have shown that they are both members of the "Clinton legacy damage control crew". And they wonder why people mistrust the media.
What you did not hear today:
Well, in the usual introduction before the show, sort of like an agenda of what will be discussed, there was no mention again of the Valerie Plame non-scandal or "Plame-out". I guess the topic will be filed by the liberal media in the "Oops! Who, me?" archives. Sorry, Mr. Rove, Mr. Libby no apologies for you. After all we in the media only meant well..you know the guardians of democracy.
But there was another non-topic: the real scandal of the media nomenklatura and Hollywoodgentsia's silence before the onslaught of censorship by the Democratic Party machinery against a little docudrama about 9/11 by ABC. Apparently it threatens the already obviously flimsy Clinton legacy. No one in the media or in the artistic community has come out in the defense of the writer, or ABC or freedom of speech. No one in the media has come out in defense of one of their colleagues. A political party uses the power of Congress to ask a network to "pull out" as Sen. Reid has said "a work of fiction" and nobody in the liberal writer's community says anything?
Acting like someone he admires, President Clinton, has unleashed the full force of his stormtroopers or better yet "turbas divinas" (divine mobs as in the Sandinistas) against ABC. Thus, we have renamed him Fidel Clinton. No serious mention whatsoever today of this real scandal of suppression of speech on the Diane Rehm Show.
Under marching orders of Fidel Clinton, The Democratic Party Ministry of Culture and Propaganda, headed by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and assisted by Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, Senator Debbie Stabenow, Senator Charles Schumer and Senator Byron Dorgan, has sent a threatening letter to ABC which intimates that their license could be in jeopardy once their hope for and almost guaranteed return to power takes place.
Just about every apparatchik of the Stalinist Clinton establishment have come out en masse after receiving their marching orders from the Democrat Caudillo. Of course, it is right to defame and destroy the reputation of Scooter Libby and Karl Rove, President Bush and Vicepresident Chenney but you portray Fidel Clinton as he is and whoaaaah!, the towers of his flimsy legacy are in instant danger of being brought down.
A caller tells Diane that he is outraged not by all this but by the fact the media is not hard enough on Bush! According to this "caller" reporters are not doing their job, then as an example that some are, Diane asked the caller if he heard her interview the day before of David Corn and Michael Isikoff.
Veeeery interesting as they would say in the KGB, that the thrust of that appearance was Mr. Bush's intelligence failure during 9 months in office and not the previous two terms of Mr. Clinton during which the same intelligence was developed.
But these two exemplars of reporting are unique. Mr. Isikoff alone is responsible for the deaths of many people in riots provoked due to his false claim about the abuse of the Koran by US troops. And Mr. Corn is the Ann Coulter of the left. I'm waiting for the book "The Lies of David Corn". Shouldn't they be there apologizing and eating crow for their defamation of innocent people in the Valerie Plame non-scandal? What were these gentlemen really doing there, trying to preempt ABC's damaging upcoming series?
Regime change in Iraq was the policy of the Clinton administration. Really, Mr. Corn isn't "the central point" of your campaign that the only thing you have is a matter of proving intentions and motives? You are bent to prove something you can't, that President Bush had all along the evil intention of war with Iraq. Isn't that the case? "There seem to be something particular about Saddam Hussein that got under the president's skin", said David Corn.
When Mr. Isikoff says, "the reason is Saddam's attempt to kill his father" DianeRehm responded, "you don't go to war because of a personal thing?"
The only thing certain that Mr. Corn said all morning is that "this book is a narrative" as such not one "about what went on." And this is what passes today for journalism?
Somewhat caught in the embarrassing slip of Mr. Corn, Mr. Isikoff then allows room for the fact that people around the President may have "pulled" the intelligence to bolster their conclusions, but not David Corn, he insists that the president lied even though he has nothing to prove it with. Either way, they have shown that they are both members of the "Clinton legacy damage control crew". And they wonder why people mistrust the media.
posted by José Alejandro Amorós at 7:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home