Now that former White House press secretary Scott McClellan has written a tell-all book about the Bush administration, he's being lauded with so much praise from the usual liberal media suspects that it must be making MSNBC's Keith Olbermann a tad jealous.
This makes Chris Wallace's interview Thursday with WOR radio's Steve Malzberg even more timely, for the "Fox News Sunday" host showed his colleagues what the term "journalism" really means by going after both of these press darlings.
First, Wallace discussed a key question he'd like to ask McClellan that's been completely absent as media applaud the former press secretary's claims (17 minute audio available here, relevant section at minute 6:00):
One of the questions I would ask him, though, and I think this is a legitimate issue: if he, unless this is completely a post-White House conversion, if he had any doubts about, you know, that this was propaganda, and that the President was leading us into a war on bad information, I mean, the person that was in in fact doing that as the President's spokesman was Scott McClellan. I mean, it was McClellan that was up at the podium defending the President's policies in Iraq, and if he felt that was part of the propaganda effort, and had any doubts about it, and, and, and as a result of his words was enabling young men and women to go to Iraq where they were being killed for a bad war, that's a pretty serious thing. And that would be something that you'd really have to, you know, weigh heavily on your conscience I would think. So, I think Scott has to answer for that.
Makes sense, doesn't it? Shouldn't this be the first question McClellan is asked in any interview? As he was the front-man, how does he get to point fingers without anyone asking him why HE spoke such words if he didn't believe them and felt that they were putting innocent Americans unnecessarily in harm's way?
Was it all about the money and prestige THEN, or NOW?
How obvious is this, and why aren't so-called journalists grilling McClellan about it? After all, he either knew he was lying then, and did so for his own personal reasons, or is lying now.
There really isn't a middle-ground here, is there? And, the idea that supposedly impartial journalists across the fruited plain are either too biased to ask such a question, or too addle-minded to recognize the hypocrisy, should keep all of us awake at night.
Next, Malzberg mentioned that Wallace's boss Rupert Murdoch was quoted in the Wall Street Journal referring to Keith Olbermann as being crazy. Wallace responded (minute 14):
I stand by Mr. Rupert Murdoch on that opinion. I'm not going to comment on his sanity. You know, I will say this: we get an awful lot of heat, Fox News does, for being biased or in the tank. I have never heard any one of Fox News, the worst screed by Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity, that compares to Keith Olbermann and what he says. I mean, when he talks about Bush, and I happened to be watching it that night, and said, "Shut the hell up," or when he talked on Friday about Hillary Clinton and the quote "assassination remarks," and goes on for ten minutes on a rant, nobody else in broadcasting does it. And, you know, if he can, and if MSNBC wants to put that on the air, I think it's gonna, I think it'll turn around. I don't think that's a very successful idea for how a news organization ought to be operated. [...]
But the other thing is, I mean, one of the things is Sean Hannity, terrific personality, and I think a valued part of Fox News, Bill O'Reilly. But, you know, Fox News doesn't have them anchor our evening news coverage. I mean, they know that they are people with sharp political opinions, and so they have people like Brit Hume and, I'm proud to say myself, doing the straight news coverage and then we go for commentary from people like Hannity and O'Reilly. But, yet, there's, there's Keith Olbermann, you know, one minute delivering a rant about "Shut the hell up, President Bush," and then the next minute he's the anchor of their news coverage or their election coverage.
Exactly, Chris, and this is the distinction that liberals in the media, in the blogosphere, and at NBC just don't seem to grasp.
Why might that be?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
No video at link. This links
May 29, 2008 - 22:24 ET by FairlightNo audio at link. Link points to .jpg .
FL
May 29, 2008 - 22:32 ET by Noel SheppardFL,
Working on it. Been a long day. :-) ns
Thanks Noel. Listening
May 29, 2008 - 23:09 ET by FairlightThanks Noel. Listening now...
ps- (you can delete these messages if you like:)
No audio at link. This links
May 29, 2008 - 22:23 ET by Fairlightdouble post
-
May 29, 2008 - 22:23 ET by dahliatraversAs he was the front-man, how does he get to point fingers without anyone asking him why HE spoke such words?
Exactly.
Was it all about the money and prestige THEN, or NOW?
And that's the point. It was about both. The money and prestige of being the White House Press Sec. The money and prestige of doing a flip-flop once he was out. [And the lame-o mea culpa doesn't cover you, Scott. Not by a long shot.]
In short, he wants to have it all ways.
dahlia...........
May 29, 2008 - 22:38 ET by BEGRUNTHe is nothing more than an opportunistic mercenary, looking to cash in, selling out to a Soros based editor. He is lower than slime, and should be shunned by any legitimate news organization. How convenient he all of a sudden has issues with what he presented to the press when he was press sec. What a spineless, gutless wonder. All about the bucks right Scott? I hope you enjoy your blood money. Your 15 minutes are about up.
"If a man does his best, what else is there"?
General George S. Patton Jr.
Noel... Do you really
May 29, 2008 - 22:39 ET by Clear thinkerNoel...
Do you really expect left leaning news outlets to do the right thing?
Other than professional dictates, is there any law that should keep these news outlets from blatantly taking sides?
"Abstain from McCain"
The reason you don't hear
May 29, 2008 - 22:43 ET by ThermistoclesThe reason you don't hear the same question from anyone else is that 98% of the press is gleefully slopping this up as another opportunity to engage in BDS. It just feels too good to do the happy dance and say "I told you so".
It's just like the MSM "Bush stole the Election", "Bush Lied about Iraq", "Val was Covert" insanity. Facts and logic are beside the point. The fake but true journalist standard lives on.
Olbermann the dobermen is a so over the top, it boggles the mind. I wonder what keeps his audience of half a dozen so loyal?
That McClellan would lower
May 29, 2008 - 23:18 ET by SMGalbraithThat McClellan would lower himself to appear on Olbermann's show after all of the vicious and personal attacks that Olbermann has directed at him and the Administration he served tells us a great deal about the former Press Secretary.
I'll leave it to others as to what they think it shows.
Right on, SMG. Can't you
May 29, 2008 - 23:32 ET by Scout FinchRight on, SMG. Can't you just hear Scotty breathlessly fawning over Olbermann, saying, "You like me! You really like me!"
Scout,
May 29, 2008 - 23:36 ET by BlondeWasn't that Sally Field?
Riiiight.....perhaps SMcC's younger sis. Got it...never mind.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Yep. Sally famously and
May 29, 2008 - 23:57 ET by Scout FinchYep. Sally famously and embarrasingly cried it out when she won her second Oscar (for Places in the Heart) in 1985. She actually said, "...you like me, right now, you like me!"
At any rate, I can still see Scotty all a-twitter as he makes the rounds on the usual liberal newstalk circuit, looking for love in all the right places.
Quite so, Scout
May 30, 2008 - 00:04 ET by BlondeScotty, a la Sally, has achieved his five minutes of fame. It is rather pathetic. He sucked at his job, and he's not doing too well as a Bush denier, either.
The idiot Congresscritter from Palm Beach, Florida now has plans to supoena Scotty....for the Wexler Impeachment extravaganza. Rich.
Um, I mean silly and stupid. Too bad, Scotty. Avarice equals Congressional testimony, these days....and if you forget, you might get Scootered. Um, um....never mind (says Scott).
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I mean, it was McClellan
May 29, 2008 - 23:22 ET by motherbeltI mean, it was McClellan that was up at the podium defending the President's policies in Iraq, and if he felt that was part of the propaganda effort, and had any doubts about it, and, and, and as a result of his words was enabling young men and women to go to Iraq where they were being killed for a bad war, that's a pretty serious thing. And that would be something that you'd really have to, you know, weigh heavily on your conscience I would think. So, I think Scott has to answer for that. -Wallace.
In a post in another thread on this subject, I included a quote from McClellan, that was in an article on this subject at Politico. I can't find the original article again, but McClellan had basically said that he was answering in good faith, but had "since come to realize" that some of the things he was passing on were not true; that he had been deceived.
This is why I have said all along that McClellan is simply doing what a lot of others have done....claimed, after the fact, that way back when, Bush lied to get us into the war. Only he did it in print.
I haven't read his book, but I would bet that at no time does he report that in his position, he knew anything that could make him an accomplice to any lying or conspiracy that was supposedly going on in the White House. I would imagine everything is approached from a "now I realize I was lied to and used."
He would be stupid to do otherwise.
"This is why I have said
May 30, 2008 - 01:15 ET by ckc1227"This is why I have said all along that McClellan is simply doing what a
lot of others have done....claimed, after the fact, that way back when,
Bush lied to get us into the war. Only he did it in print."
And, just like all the others, he offers no proof to back up his claim. I mean, how difficult would it be for someone who was on the inside and who participated in the "propaganda" to point to one, just one specific incident or conversation proving that we were lied into the war? And I don't mean something stupid like " I saw Scooter and Rove talking so that proves they were lying about Plame", I mean something like "I sat in on a meeting where I heard Bush say specifically that he knew Iraq had no WMD, so we have to lie about it to the American people."
With so many people who are so confident that Bush lied us into war, would it be hard to find one who can actually back it up with proof rather than feelings?
McClellan simply did what
May 30, 2008 - 07:04 ET by motherbeltMcClellan simply did what all the others did..practiced 20/20 hindsight. When huge caches of WMD weren't found, they went back and examined everything that they could remember or find, and re-examined it in the light of their new knowledge, concluding not that the administration was mistaken, but that they lied.
Excellent points, Noel...
May 29, 2008 - 23:57 ET by PrairieSkyThe best I think is that McClellan either knew he was lying when he was press secretary, OR he is lying now. There are really no other logical scenarios. Another thing I'd like to know is, who's idea was this book? Did McClellan go publisher shopping on his own, or did someone approach him with the book idea?
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American people. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan, January 20, 1981
Russert this Sunday
May 30, 2008 - 00:15 ET by Rush FanThe only newsman at NBC who appears to be somewhat fair and balanced is Tim Russert. Certainly he leans to the left, but I’ve seen him ask tough questions of Democrats in the past. Scott McClellan will be his guest on Meet The Press this Sunday, so we will know soon enough if Russert will give an honest interview.
As for MSNBC: The cable network and blockheads Matthews, Olbermann and Abrams have gone so far to the left that I had to remove the channel from my listing in order to reduce my stress level. Moreover, I emailed General Electric and informed them I would no longer buy anything with the GE brand.
"You're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts"
RUSH FAN...
May 30, 2008 - 01:24 ET by danybhoyYou hit it EXACTLY right, Russert is the only one who seems t know how to be fair, I would add Bob Costas as well, but he's more of a sports journalist. He does go into non sports stuff on his 2 hour weekend radio gig, & is very good at understanding that you can disagree without being disagreeable, which is 1 big reason I enjoy watching/listening to him. Unlike his Sunday night football partner BathTubBoy, if you disagree with him, you are a dumb & should be branded as such for all to see.
As for you comment on MSNBC, while I have not blocked them from my channel lineup, I don't tune in very often. They were dropped from the XM lineup a few years ago, & I still don't miss it. I won't buy GE products as well, I have not written them to say so, but I won't buy their lightbulbs, & if I were buying an aircraft, I would'nt have GE engines on it. This goes for anything in between as well, toasters, ovens, whatever. No GE for me, maybe ever again.
"...it's still We The People, Right?" Megadeth
yahbut,
May 30, 2008 - 09:19 ET by pbanks7I can't forgive Russert for asserting that he "forgot" you can't have your attorney in a grand jury hearing. He has a friggin law degree! Graduated with honors from the Cleveland Marshall College of Law!!!
So he perjured himself and got away with it because he negotiated a video testimony with no cross-examination. Scooter Libby got the shaft in so many ways.
MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe.
Yeah, he continues to get
May 30, 2008 - 16:43 ET by fitzfongYeah, he continues to get away with that bit of fraud while keeping his undeserved reputation intact. A complete phony.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
MR. POTATO-HEAD
May 31, 2008 - 08:13 ET by danybhoyI said Russert was about th only at NBC NEWS WHO SEEMS TO KNOW HOW TO BE FAIR, I did not say he was always fair. You can see his leanings when you watch him, I would'nt deny that.
I agree that Libby was screwed 6 ways to Sunday by a VERY POLITICAL prosecutor in Fitzgerald. That sucks to this day & those involved after it was known that Dick was the leaker should be brought down. It will never happen though.
"...it's still We The People, Right?" Megadeth
"if I were buying an
May 30, 2008 - 09:28 ET by NL207"if I were buying an aircraft, I would'nt have GE engines on it"
A word of advice: 'If the engines say P&W, the seats had better say Martin-Baker'
NL207...
May 31, 2008 - 08:20 ET by danybhoyI was thinking of Rolls Royce engines actually. But I'm not exactly in the market looking to purchase any aircraft right now. My point was to hit the extremes of what people can buy made by GE, lightbulbs & aircraft engines seem to cover both ends of the spectrum.
"...it's still We The People, Right?" Megadeth
Don't get it twisted!
May 30, 2008 - 09:03 ET by americaneaglePlease don't fool yourself into believing that Tim Russert is a fair minded journalist. He has consistently been tougher in his interviews of Repubicans and conservatives than he has ever been in his dealings with his Democrat pals, and we all know it. He recently proved it with his Obama cheerleading and his pronouncement that the Democratic nomination process was over...even as there were more primaries to be contested.
He isn't fair and he isn't that good; he's just the best of a terrible lot at NBC/MSNBC. If you want to see a real journalist, look no further than Chris Wallace or Brit Hume.
And don't get me started on that pompous midget Bob Costas...
Please don't fool
May 30, 2008 - 09:31 ET by general companyPlease don't fool yourself into believing that Tim Russert is a fair minded journalist.
Exactly, he is an accomplice in the mess known as nbc
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Good point that's sure to
May 30, 2008 - 00:23 ET by wiwfGood point that's sure to be buried
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
Scott "Benedict Arnold" McClellan
May 30, 2008 - 01:16 ET by thoridflyThat is THE PRIMARY, if not ONLY, question to ask that son of a bitch ...
"WHY didn't YOU do or say ANYTHING about all these so-called lies and deceptions, Mr. McClellan?"
Well, there are other questions, too ...
"WHY did YOU do NOTHING to stop these alleged lies and deceptions, Mr. McClellan?"
"How many millions of dollars are you making from this book, Mr. McClellan?"
"Which lifelong Democrat operatives approached you to do this book, Mr. McClellan?"
"So you think Saddam Hussein should have REMAINED in power and been allowed to continue to murder 1000's of Iraqis each year ... is that right, Mr. McClellan?"
"So you think a despotic dictatorship is BETTER for the Iraqi people than a democracy ... is that right, Mr. McClellan?"
"So you think the Iraqis don't DESERVE to have a democracy and the freedoms that come with that form of government ... is that right, Mr. McClellan?"
"So the Middle East would have been BETTER OFF if Saddam and the Baathists had remained in power ... is that right, Mr. McClellan?"
"So you're saying the appropriate U.S. policy toward dictators is to ALLOW them to enculcate their power while they gather threats against regional and global security ... is that right, Mr. McClellan?"
"You DID graduate from the 8th grade, didn't you Mr. McClellan?"
The leftist media have no
May 30, 2008 - 02:07 ET by DarasenThe leftist media have no intention whatsoever of
questioning anyone saying what they want to hear. The simple fact that there is
no scrutiny of this man or his motives is simply reflective of the bias in the their
“reporting”
Scottie's book is not meant
May 30, 2008 - 02:33 ET by CooltomScottie's book is not meant to be a concience-clearing tome -- it is a job application to work in the MSM. He wants a gig like Stephanopoulos and the only way to get one is to go left. He can't work for Fox, who like all with a conservative bent, knew he was a no-talent buffoon.
Frankly, Scottie's pique strikes me as being his payback for being left out of the cool crowd at the White House (for obvious reasons) and are the classic bleatings of one who was in over his head and was too dim to realize it.
Bush Bashing - The Mindset of the Far Left
May 30, 2008 - 03:11 ET by Rush FanRemember when Johnny Carson played Carmac the magician with his 'hermetically sealed envelopes"? He would give an answer, than open the envelope for the question. Well, let’s play Carmac. The answer is: George Bush. The envelope is opened and the question is: Ask anyone on the far left who is responsible for killing more people: Saddam Hussein or George Bush.
"You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts"
The Big Difference
May 30, 2008 - 03:00 ET by gordonChris Wallace understands the difference between a commentator and a journalist. MSNBC and their partners in propaganda clearly believe the two professions to be identical. I do not share his optimistic view that somehow the networks will realize their mistake, rush in, and change their methods. They will eventually go the way of the New York Times, shouting their shopworn liberal phrases as they circle the drain.
Anybody else
May 30, 2008 - 07:01 ET by 10ksnookerFind it really inconvenient that the US Congress voted for the Iraq War, twice, and some luminaries like Mrs Clinton, even crowed she did her own 'independent research' about Iraq and concluded it was a go ... What are they, so gullible that Bush lied to them, and the gullible part, they believed him.
And about those last UN resolutions, and all those 'other' foreign intelligence services saying Iraq had WMDs. We never hear much about this when the Bush lied narrative is trotted out. If Bush lied, he sure had a lot of lying Democrat Socialist friends.
It does appear this is a drive to appease the fruit-loops wing of the Democrat Socialist party. After all, they had to tell the fools they lied about withdrawing from Iraq to get elected, so they need to do something quick.
Yesterday, the same day a 100 nations were applauding Iraq and it's government for the good progress they have made on all fronts, Comrade Pelosi had to go out and say, "I see nuthing, nuting I tell you" -- Using of course her very best Comrade Schultz accent. You do begin to believe it's not just an act, she really is this stu ...
Where would we be if we did not go to war?
May 30, 2008 - 09:04 ET by toucheNow that we are rid of The middle east dirt bag, we are told we never needed to do it? If we did not go to war what would today look like? Just before we invaded the UN was about to drop sanctions on Saddam, thanks to the French and other corrupt officials in the food for oil scam. So today Iraq would have rebuilt rebuilt everything. Also WND have been found, just not nukes. How much more of that stuff would be around? Yes things would be wonderful right now if we had not taken out Saddam. I wonder if he would have raised the amount he was paying for every suicide bomber that killed one of us to more the $25,000 a head by now. I am fuzzy on the propaganda thing? Yep, media asks nothing about what I want to know.
McClellan
May 30, 2008 - 09:18 ET by VonuPeople seem surprised that spokesholes lie. That is why these people are hired, they are good liars. Look at Tony Snow, the sainted one. He repeatedly lied his a ass off to lay cover for Nyfong Johnny Sutton's illegal prosecution of Ramos and Compean. Now if a freaking saint can be so could hearted as to let 2 Federal agents rot in jail for 10 years for performing their duties then what we can expect from normal people is rather chilling.
Silent cabbage patch kid
May 30, 2008 - 12:05 ET by Eileen RightWhere’s Carvilla crying Judas?
Scott McClellan - MSM Prank Monkey
KO Should Stick w/ CD
May 30, 2008 - 15:14 ET by the curatorthere's Keith Olbermann, you know, one minute delivering a rant about "Shut the hell up, President Bush," and then the next minute he's the anchor of their news coverage or their election coverage.
I'm no fan of this administration... and I do believe FOX News has, in many ways, schilled for our president.
But, in now way, shape or form do I think Keith Olbermann should be anchoring straight news coverage.
He's good at what he does. He's a mouthpeice for a lot of people (agree with him or not)... but, he's an opinionist through and through.
He has no place anchoring what's supposed to be objective news coverage.
And, again, while I feel FOX News slants things in a conservative way... you make a great point, Mr. Sheppard... BO or Hannity will never been seen as anything other than an analyst on evening news coverage. (Granted, Brit Hume is not a true example of objectivity... but, more believable than the others I've mentioned).
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
In an obejctive analysis I
May 30, 2008 - 17:19 ET by BDIn an obejctive analysis I thinkyou will find Hume closer to the center of the political spectrum than his competitors.
These include:
So, I think we can establish that Hume, who is slightly right of center, can be considered moderation in and of itself.
I'd disagree with how you
May 30, 2008 - 18:04 ET by the curatorI'd disagree with how you presented the news readers.
Hume, by his own admission, is a conservative.
"Sure, I'm a conservative, no doubt about it," - Washington Post, April 19, 2006
Hume, however, isn't so blatant with his slant. Here's a perfect example from the same article.
On April 6, when every network newscast led with the revelation that President Bush had authorized former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to leak classified information about Iraq, Hume began his program with an apology by Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney for a physical altercation with a Capitol police officer a week earlier. Bush and the CIA leak was Hume's third story.
Clearly the biggest story of the day, which Mr. Hume buried.
All that said, I'll give him all the credit in the world. He's got a resume rivaled by few. He's a dedicated journalist whom I enjoy watching. But, there is a slant there. Subtle... but, there as evidenced by his story stacking referenced in the WaPo article.
Couric I don't believe is slanted... just not a good anchor.
Williams I've always like and believe him to be fair... Same with Gibson.
And, Cooper, I have as much respect for as anyone in the business. You're talking about someone, who at 19, hopped a plane with nothing but a handi-cam and the clothes on his back... traveled to some of the most war-torn places in the world, just to report the stories that no one else would. He's the definition of a journalists. Politics may not be his strong suit... but, there are many aspects to a reporter that don't involve politics.
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
-George W. Bush, October 11, 2000
Hume, by his own admission,
May 30, 2008 - 18:25 ET by BDHume, by his own admission, is a conservative.
"Sure, I'm a conservative, no doubt about it," - Washington Post, April 19, 2006
And i concur, but when measured agains tth other four the sliding scale looks as follows.
Liberal---------------------------Moderate--------------------Conservative
Coop Couric Will Gib Hume
Regarding your post of
On April 6, when every network newscast led with the revelation that President Bush had authorized former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to leak classified information about Iraq, Hume began his program with an apology by Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney for a physical altercation with a Capitol police officer a week earlier. Bush and the CIA leak was Hume's third story.
The Libby story is bogus. There is no evidence that this discussion betwen the president and his team occured. There is evidence that McKinney was in a physical altercation with a security policemena. Ergo, HUME was being responsible and a good jjournalist.
Couric I don't believe is slanted...
Cooper not slanted
Gibson & Williams not slanted
Are you kidding? I guess this tells us you are part of the 83% of journalists who, while thinking they are moderate actually show up on the scale as far left. it is perception
Where's Tony Snow?
May 30, 2008 - 16:31 ET by billbI'd be interested in Tony's comments