2. Cafferty Cites Gorbachev, Asks Is Bush 'Reigniting Cold War'?
3. Blitzer Again Lobbies Republicans to Mimic Liberal Schwarzenegger
4. ABC Touts Religious Friendly Dems; Could Be 'New Party of God?'
5. Gumbel Brags He Was 'Correct' to Call Conservative 'F**ing Idiot'
6. AP Reporter Sees 9-11 As 'Bush Admin Conspiracy Hung on Al-Qaeda'
Discussing the G-8 summit with CBS's Jim Axelrod, Katie Couric on Wednesday night portrayed an "adamant" President George Bush as the antagonist causing Russian President Vladimir Putin to be "annoyed" about NATO plans to install a missile shield in Poland, a controversy, she fretted, that is distracting attention from global warming. "Economic issues and climate change were supposed to be the main topics," Couric asserted on the CBS Evening News, "but they're being overshadowed by the dispute between President Bush and Russia's President, Vladimir Putin, over NATO plans to install a defensive missile shield in Eastern Europe," a shield designed to protect Europe from missiles launched by rogue states.
Referring to Putin's threat to aim missiles at Europe, Couric pressed Axelrod, who was on scene in Rostock, Germany: "Putin is annoyed about this missile defense system. Why is President Bush so adamant about this?" Couric's next question displayed concern about the impact on an agreement on global warming: "I know that global warming was at the top of the agenda. Has that fallen off the radar screen, given all this chatter?"
[This item was posted Wednesday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
The MRC's Brad Wilmouth provided a transcript of the exchange on the June 6 CBS Evening News:
KATIE COURIC: Turning overseas now, the G-8 Summit opened today at a resort in Germany. Economic issues and climate change were supposed to be the main topics. But they're being overshadowed by the dispute between President Bush and Russia's President, Vladimir Putin, over NATO plans to install a defensive missile shield in Eastern Europe. Late today, I spoke with our chief White House correspondent, Jim Axelrod, who's traveling with the President.
On Wednesday's The Situation Room on CNN, during his regular "Cafferty File" segment, Jack Cafferty quoted Mikhail Gorbachev's recent attack on the Bush administration in which the former Soviet leader accused the U.S. of "arrogance" and of having "lost credibility" in response to President Bush's plans to deploy a missile defense system in Europe. Cafferty asked viewers to e-mail him with a response to the question of whether Bush was "reigniting the Cold War with Russia." Cafferty: "This is just swell, don't you think? We've got trouble with Russia now, which we haven't had for a number of years. The question is this: Is President Bush reigniting the Cold War with Russia?"
[This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Thursday morning on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Cafferty opened the segment: "Wolf, 'The U.S.'s plans to build a missile defense shield in Europe are arrogant and threaten to usher in a new Cold War.' Those are the words of former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev." He soon cited the former communist leader's contention that "70 percent of the Czech people don't want the missile shield in their country" before further quoting Gorbachev's charge that the U.S. has "lost credibility in the world." Cafferty: "Gorbachev also says this: 'There is the possibility that self-confidence, arrogance will lead to a situation similar to that with the war in Iraq. The United States is driving itself into a corner. They've lost credibility in the world,' unquote."
When Cafferty returned at the end of the 5:00 hour to read viewer e-mails, most of which were anti-Bush, he not only found amusement over one viewer's comparison of a U.S. plan for a system in Europe to fend off Iran to a Russian system in Canada to fend off Mexico, as he chuckled slightly at the suggestion, but he also mildly imitated President Bush as he read one viewer's rendition of a conversation between Bush and Vladimir Putin.
Below is a transcript of Cafferty's segment which aired at 5:08 p.m. EDT on the June 6 The Situation Room, followed by a transcript of his reading of email responses from viewers, which aired shortly before 6:00 p.m.:
JACK CAFFERTY, at 5:08 p.m.: Wolf, "The U.S.'s plans to build a missile defense shield in Europe are arrogant and threaten to usher in a new Cold War." Those are the words of former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. He believes that putting these anti-missile sites in Poland and the Czech Republic will make Europe a target again. And he points out that polls show that 70 percent of the Czech people don't want the missile shield in their country. Gorbachev also says this: "There is the possibility that self-confidence, arrogance will lead to a situation similar to that with the war in Iraq. The United States is driving itself into a corner. They've lost credibility in the world," unquote. Mikhail Gorbachev.
CAFFERTY, at 5:58 p.m.: The question is, is President Bush reigniting the Cold War with Russia? Darren in Michigan writes: "Without a doubt. I wonder how Bush would feel if Putin wanted to set up a missile defense system in Canada to help keep Mexico from becoming a world threat?"
During Tuesday night's Republican debate, CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer attempted to goad Representative Duncan Hunter into agreeing that the national GOP should be "following that Arnold Schwarzenegger example" in California. That was the fourth time since the 2006 midterms that Blitzer, host of CNN's Situation Room, has lobbied for the GOP to adopt the liberal policies of the Republican Governor. During the preamble to his question, Blitzer noted how "popular" Schwarzenegger is with moderates and approved of how the former actor attempts to "forge a consensus."
[This item, by Scott Whitlock, was posted Wednesday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
CNN's cheerleading for Schwarzenegger's brand of Republicanism began shortly after the midterm election. On November 9, Bill Schneider, a reporter for Blitzer's Situation Room, wondered about the GOP's future: "Will Republicans move further to the right? Not if they got the message of the election. Republicans lost because they abandoned the center....The election also provides an alternative model of a Republican who moved to the center and thrived."
That Republican, of course, was Arnold Schwarzenegger. On November 20, the CNN reporters were at it again. Anchor Wolf Blitzer gushed over the Arnold model: "In California, Schwarzenegger carried independent voters handily. He reclaimed the center. Schwarzenegger did two things President Bush has never done. He flatly acknowledged his mistakes, and he changed course."
This year, on February 26, the cable anchor once again marveled at how "Arnold Schwarzenegger thinks in shades of purple" and asserted that the former actor is pushing the national party to do the same.
So, Wolf Blitzer and CNN think that Republicans should mimic Governor Schwarzenegger? Any chance that they would call for the Democrats to adopt the policies of former Senator Zell Miller?
Below is the exchange between Blitzer and Duncan Hunter during the June 5 debate that aired live from 7 to 9pm. The question and answer occurred at around 8:55pm EDT:
Wolf Blitzer: "Congressman Hunter, I want you to weigh in, because Arnold Schwarzenegger, your Governor in California, has become very popular out there by bringing in independents and moderates, and trying to forge a consensus among Republicans and Democrats in your state. Shouldn't the GOP nationally be following that Arnold Schwarzenegger example in California?"
On Tuesday's Good Morning America, the ABC program devoted two segments to promoting the religiosity of the 2008 Democratic contenders. At the same time, a graphic hopefully asked, "Are Evangelicals Embracing Democrats? New Party of God?"
Recapping a CNN sponsored event on Monday night where '08 contenders talked about their faith, ABC featured two liberals who were making the Democratic case for Christian voters. GMA co-host Robin Roberts interviewed Jim Wallis, the left-wing editor of Sojourners magazine which sponsored the forum aired by CNN. Neither Roberts, nor the ABC graphic made any mention of his liberal slant. Additionally, a segment hosted by reporter Dan Harris featured this quote from one Mara Vanderslice, senior partner at Common Good Strategies: "This year, I think the Democrats are more comfortable talking about religion and values."
Vanderslice just happens to have strong ties to the Democratic Party, is the former Director of Religion for the 2004 John Kerry campaign and had past associations to extreme left wing groups: www.newsmax.com Perhaps GMA viewers should have been apprised of those facts in relation to Vanderslice's contention that Democrats are "more comfortable" with religion.
A few minutes earlier, co-host Roberts introduced the segment by noting that the Democrats hope to close, what she pointedly called the "so-called God gap." Dan Harris used his segment to prominently highlight just how Democrats are "comfortable" with religion:
Dan Harris: "John Edwards said he strayed from the church for many years but that his faith came roaring back during a personal crisis."
[This item, by Scott Whitlock, was posted Tuesday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
In a follow-up segment, Roberts interviewed Reverend Wallis. She also reiterated the point that Democrats are comfortable with religion by noting, "We should say Senator Obama out on the campaign trail has, has freely talked about his faith." Roberts then gave Hillary Clinton what amounted to an extended campaign spot by playing a longish clip of her talking about religion:
Finally, Roberts closed by noting that Reverend Wallis had extended a similar invitation for Republicans to talk about climate change, poverty and AIDS at a Sojourners event. Now, if the Christian Coalition, at the height of its power, had invited Democrats to attend a meeting, wouldn't it be likely for a media member to ask whether or not those liberal candidates would show up? Well, Roberts didn't bother asking Wallis if he really expected the GOP contenders to appear.
Instead, she ended the segment by mentioning facts about the Republicans that would seemingly disappoint evangelical voters. Roberts noted that Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice and that Mitt Romney has changed his opinion on abortion:
Roberts: "Very free in talking about that. Reverend Wallis, I want to ask you, you have extended an invitation to the top three Republican candidates to have a similar forum to this, as this, and they have their own issues when you look at the top three. Rudy Giuliani has been married three times and has taken a pro-choice stance. We know about Mitt Romney, who has, when it comes to abortion, has changed his stance as well. McCain, in talking about stem cell research and being for that. So, what do you read into all that?"
A transcript of Roberts' interview with Reverend Wallis, which aired at 7:09am on June 5:
Roberts: "And the reverend Jim Wallis organized that forum last night. He's the author of 'God's Politics: Why The Right Gets It Wrong And The Left Doesn't Get It.' He joins us now from Washington. Good morning, reverend. Thanks for joining us."
While explaining the 2000 event, Gumbel did announce that it was "wrong" to use profanity on the air, but added that he found Knight's assertion, that the Boy Scouts should be allowed to ban gays from leadership positions, "infuriating." He also derided Knight, now the director of MRC's Culture and Media Institute (CMI) saying, "I'm going to kindly describe him as a gentleman." CMI home page: www.cultureandmediainstitute.org
[This item is adopted from a Tuesday posting, by Scott Whitlock, on the MRC's blog which included audio/video of Gumbel's remarks on the June 5 Live with Regis and Kelly, audio/video which will be added to the posted version of this CyberAlert. But in the meantime, go to: newsbusters.org ]
On June 29, 2000, Knight appeared on the Early Show to discuss a Supreme Court ruling that reaffirmed the right of the Boy Scouts to exclude homosexuals. After a contentious interview, Gumbel could be seen calling the FRC representative a "fucking idiot."
The June 29, 2000 CyberAlert Extra recounted:
A CBS camera seems to have caught a disgusted Bryant Gumbel blurting out "What a fucking idiot" just after wrapping up a hostile interview with Robert Knight of the Family Research Council (FRC). The incident occurred at about 7:15am ET Thursday, June 29 following Knight's appearance to defend the Boy Scout policy of excluding gays from being leaders, a policy the Supreme Court had re-affirmed the day before.
Gumbel's hostile reception for Knight had followed a much kinder approach to a representative of Planned Parenthood who had come aboard to support the Court's ruling overturning a law which banned partial-birth abortions.
Here's the how and when on Gumbel's vulgar insult, or at least what looked like one. Immediately after the interview, Gumbel threw the show to weather guy Mark McEwen outside. McEwen joked about his Survivor prediction: "A week ago, Bryant, remember Bryant I told you Dirk was going to get thrown off the island. I was a week late, one week late."
CBS then switched back to Gumbel inside, probably for his reaction to McEwen's quip, but instead viewers got about two seconds of Gumbel leaning forward to get up and out of his chair as he uttered: "What a fucking idiot." The first two words are audible and clear, the second two are inaudible but you can read his lips.
CBS quickly cut back to McEwen with the weather.
END of Excerpt
For the full CyberAlert, with a RealPlayer video clip which will be added to this CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org
Gumbel has never apologized for the incident. In fact, CBS originally contended that the remark was not directed at Knight. The July 12, 2000 CyberAlert described the denials:
Last Wednesday the Capitol Hill Blue Webs site [sic] ran an item which claimed Mark McEwen was Gumbel's real target. Here's an excerpt:
...CBS insiders, however, tell us that neither Gumbel nor the network has any intention of apologizing to Knight or the FRC because those close to the turbulent morning show say Gumbel was not hurling the epithet at Knight, but at Early Show weatherman Mark McEwen.
"Bryant considers Mark a lesser talent and finds it harder and harder to hide his lack of respect for him," says one former Early Show insider. "He was upset over Mark's crowing about picking one of the participants to be ousted in the Survivor series."
END of Excerpt
While still not apologizing, Gumbel's latest comments finally acknowledge the obvious: The liberal anchor intended the vulgarity for a conservative whose views didn't square with his own. In a statement to NewsBusters, Robert Knight, now the Director of CMI, noted, "The fact is, they stonewalled and denied and now Mr. Gumbel has admitted the truth which is that he did utter the epithet out of frustration and was caught on camera doing so."
Knight added that "[Gumbel] is apparently unrepentant and does not regard such rudeness as a thing to be avoided when it comes to conservatives."
The MRC has issued a press release condemning Gumbel's latest comments: www.mrc.org
Other, numerous examples of liberal bias committed by the liberal anchor can be found here: www.mediaresearch.org
A partial transcript of Gumbel's comments on the June 5 edition of Live With Regis and Kelly are below:
Kelly Ripa: "This is live television. I could say anything. I could blow at any time! But you want to make sure that if something accidentally comes out of your mouth. And on purpose is one thing. On purpose. But an accident, you know-"
With no shortage of items documenting how the American media are liberally biased, it's often easy to forget how the European media are so much more dominated by the hard left. In his cover story on the war in Afghanistan in the June 11 Weekly Standard, Michael Fumento recounted his experience embedded with the U.S. military at Forward Operating Base Lagman in the Zabul province of Afghanistan.
Fumento was assigned quarters with two Spaniards working for the Associated Press. One of them seemed to be in a mind-meld with Rosie O'Donnell ("he believes 9/11 was a Bush administration conspiracy hung on al Qaeda") while the other reporter "never takes off his Che Guevera T-shirt."
No wonder the European press think our media are just a bunch of Bush administration cheerleaders.
[This item, by Rich Noyes, was posted Wednesday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Fumento's piece is a fascinating window into "The Other War" in Afghanistan, a front in the War on Terror that he says is winnable, but needs renewed attention: Here's the relevant excerpt:
Our convoy pulls into Forward Operating Base Lagman at 1200 hours. After three embeds in Iraq, I'm finally visiting "the forgotten war," fought in a truly exotic land rich with history. In fact, I've just seen The Castle, an amazing fortress the locals claim Alexander the Great built....
FOB Lagman is not a fun place, although at least there's no rule requiring constant body armor, as was the case where I stayed in Ramadi, Iraq. Lagman doesn't get shelled. I'm squeezed in with two AP video reporters from Spain in a room meant for one munchkin. There is a tiny PX, but it periodically closes to make supply runs to Kandahar. There are all of four male showers here, two with curtains missing. The water is hot, though. There is only one computer with an Internet connection. Parts of the camp are made of mud.
Apparently they have cobras here -- by which I do not mean Marine AH-1 gunship helicopters so nicknamed, but the kind that slither, hiss, and, if you're unfortunate, bite. The doctor across the way from me, Capt. Richard Slusher, assures me we have no antivenin. On the upside, it's good incentive to keep the place clean, because trash brings rodents and rodents bring snakes. They also have the ugliest, nastiest beetles I've ever seen. The little monsters fly and bite. I'm pretty sure they report directly to Osama himself.
One of the AP reporters says he believes 9/11 was a Bush administration conspiracy hung on al Qaeda. [Captain Richard] Slusher gives him hell about it -- albeit in a good-natured way. I don't hear the other reporter sound out on the subject, but he never takes off his Che Guevara T-shirt. Maybe these two will provide unbiased footage and commentary notwithstanding their personal views -- maybe not.
END of Excerpt
I'm guessing "not."
For Fumento's piece in full: www.theweeklystandard.com
-- Brent Baker