Appearance Alert!
MRC Research Director Rich Noyes on Fox Business Network at 5:55 p.m. ET

Couric: Bush Antagonist 'Annoying' Putin, Snubbing Global Warming --6/7/2007


1. Couric: Bush Antagonist 'Annoying' Putin, Snubbing Global Warming
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?"

2. Cafferty Cites Gorbachev, Asks Is Bush 'Reigniting Cold War'?
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?"

3. Blitzer Again Lobbies Republicans to Mimic Liberal Schwarzenegger
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."

4. ABC Touts Religious Friendly Dems; Could Be 'New Party of God?'
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."

5. Gumbel Brags He Was 'Correct' to Call Conservative 'F**ing Idiot'
Former CBS Early Show host Bryant Gumbel, who in 2000 was infamously caught on camera calling a conservative activist a "f***ing idiot," defended and reaffirmed his comment while guest co-hosting on Tuesday's syndicated Live With Regis and Kelly. Discussing the possibility of inadvertently swearing on live television, a topic prompted by a federal court ruling reversing FCC fines on broadcasters for airing certain vulgarities, Gumbel told co-host Kelly Ripa that he "was correct" when he used the F-word in reference to Robert Knight, then with the Family Research Council. 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." AUDIO&VIDEO See & Hear the Bias - Audio & Video Clip Archive

6. AP Reporter Sees 9-11 As 'Bush Admin Conspiracy Hung on Al-Qaeda'
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."


Couric: Bush Antagonist 'Annoying' Putin,
Snubbing Global Warming

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.
COURIC TO AXELROD: Jim, six years ago, President Bush said this of Vladimir Putin: "I looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul." Apparently, he liked what he saw then, but these two guys have not been getting along at all. And there's been a real war of words. What's going on?
JIM AXELROD: Well, you know, the President said that six years ago, and stands by the need to have some sort of personal relationship, but he's the first one to say the relationship is good, but complex. Look, they've hit a rough spot. They're going to try to iron some things out in their one-on-one meeting tomorrow. Then they'll get together for a weekend, the first weekend in July, in Kennebunkport, and hopefully continue to make strides in bringing this relationship back together.
COURIC: Apparently, Putin is annoyed about this missile defense system. Why is President Bush so adamant about this?
AXELROD: The missile defense system, Katie, to be clear, which would be based in Eastern Europe, the President says, is designed to keep rogue states -- like Iran, North Korea -- from being able to fire a missile that would hit Europe.
COURIC: And, Jim, I know that global warming was at the top of the agenda. Has that fallen off the radar screen, given all this chatter?
AXELROD: Look, Angela Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany, is the host of the G-8. And global warming is critically important to her. Now, she's pushing a plan that would cap the emissions of the gases that cause global warming -- mandatory restrictions. And just today, he said he does not support Merkel's approach.
COURIC: Jim Axelrod reporting from Germany tonight. Jim, thank you. One reason President Bush opposes those mandatory reductions is they wouldn't apply to countries like China. Right now, the U.S. pumps out the most carbon dioxide, which causes global warming -- 22 percent of the world's share, in fact. But China is second, responsible for 16 percent, and, at the rate it's going, should overtake the U.S. in two to three years. All that pollution is creating a huge crisis, not just for China, but for the entire world, and could be on the way to a city near you.

Cafferty Cites Gorbachev, Asks Is Bush
'Reigniting Cold War'?

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.
Meantime, President Bush insists the Cold War's over. He told reporters in Germany today that Russia's not going to attack Europe, that despite President Vladimir Putin's recent threats to retarget missiles on Europe if the U.S. goes ahead with its anti-missile shield plan, which is apparently meant to protect Europe from Iran. Mr. Bush said Russia's not an enemy, although he once again criticized Russia's checkered past on democratic reforms and human rights. For his part, Putin has accused the U.S. of starting a new arms race. 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?

...

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?"
Clifton in Front Royal, Virginia: "No, but many in the media are trying to ignite it, at least to make it another political issue to divide the country."
Jerome writes: "What we need is a constitutional amendment to allow a vote of 'no confidence' for a sitting president. Impeachment is too hard, the election too far away, and the man too dangerous."
Jack in South Dakota: "Jack, this is one that Bush is actually not fumbling. Vladimir Putin is by far more dangerous to world peace than Osama bin Laden. Trusting or believing him about anything is risky for the U.S. and Europe. The next two years will make that painfully clear."
Jacquelyn in Chicago: "I don't think so. Our decider likes hot wars and has dreams of mushroom clouds dancing in his head. Really, really great presidents drop nukes, you know."
Tim in Beverly, Massachusetts: "Remember the Military-Industrial-Complex? We've got to feed the beast, and a good thing like the war in Iraq isn't going to last any longer than the Bush administration, so let's get the Cold War going again and let the good times roll."
Peggy in Tennessee: "Any time a person or country challenges Bush, he retaliates like a spoiled child. If he butts heads with his friend Vladimir, we'll all be hiding under our desks again."
And Cy writes this: Quoting the president now, "When I look into your eyes, Vladimir -- he lets me call him Vladimir -- I can sense that something has changed. You used to laugh at my jokes about the French, but now I think you're laughing at me. Where did our love go?"
If you didn't see your e-mail here, you can go to CNN.com/caffertyfile. We post more of them there, along with video clips of the Cafferty File. I think I butchered the accent pretty much, Wolf.
BLITZER: That's, not bad. Not bad. See you back here in an hour, Jack. Thanks very much.

Blitzer Again Lobbies Republicans to
Mimic Liberal Schwarzenegger

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?"
Representative Duncan Hunter: "No. And let me just say, you know, I look at Governor Romney, Mayor Giuliani, my good friend John McCain -- Governor Romney joined with Bill Clinton for the 1994 gun ban when I was fighting that. Mayor Giuliani stood with him at the White House on that. Governor Romney has passed what I consider to be a major step toward socialism with respect to his mandated health care bill. John McCain is standing strong with Ted Kennedy on this Kennedy-McCain-Bush border enforcement bill. I think the guy who's got the most influence right here with these three gentlemen is Ted Kennedy. And I think we need to move away from the Kennedy wing of the Republican Party."

ABC Touts Religious Friendly Dems; Could
Be 'New Party of God?'

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."
Edwards: "When Elizabeth and I lost our son, we were non-functional for some period of time and it was the Lord that got me through that. And the same is true when Elizabeth was diagnosed with cancer."
Harris: "Barack Obama talked about how his faith informs his policy views on helping prison inmates reintegrate into society'€""
Illinois Senator Barack Obama: "There is a biblical injunction that I see to make sure that, to make sure that those young men and women have an opportunity to right their lives."

[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:
"I've been tested in ways that are both publicly known and those that are not so well-known or not known at all. My faith and the support of any extended faith family, people whom I knew who were literally praying for me in prayer chains, who were prayer warriors for me, and people whom I didn't know, who I would meet or get a letter from, sustained me through a very difficult time."

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."
Jim Wallis: "Good morning, Robin. Thank you."
Robin Roberts: "So, after what you heard last night from the Democratic presidential candidates, the top three like that, do they now get it when it comes to trying to reach Christian voters?"
Reverend Jim Wallis (President, Sojourners/Call to Renewal): "Robin, what you saw last night was a connecting of faith to a much broader set of issues. Last night, poverty was a religious issue. HIV-AIDS, climate change, prisoners, war. So, we're no longer going to have a two-issue conversation about faith and politics. I think it is a much better conversation. The agenda is wider and deeper. A whole new generation now sees poverty as a defining issue of faith for them. And you saw that last night."
Roberts: "But when you see all the polls the polls, Reverend, both from Democrats and Republicans that are going to be voting, they say the war in Iraq is number one, the economy, other things like that, health care, that those are the top priorities, that we don't see them talking about poverty and other things like that. Four years ago, as you know, of course, in the presidential election, the exit voting? Voters said the number one issue with them? Moral values. So, what do you think has changed?"
Wallis: "Well, that's the question: What are the moral values. All the issues you just talked about have moral dimensions. Last night, these Democrats were talking about the moral dimensions to those issues, and that's a critical thing. We've had a very narrow conversation. I think the era of the religious right is over. It's really finished. A new conversation has begun. It will be a better conversation in 2008 than it was in 2004. God is not a Republican or a Democrat and people of faith shouldn't be in any party's political pocket. We should hold them accountable to our moral compass. And last night, that's what we tried to do."
Roberts: "Well, last night we heard a lot from the top three and we should say Senator Obama out on the campaign trail has, has freely talked about his faith. We haven't heard as much from Senator Clinton until last night. I want to play a little more of what she said."
Clinton: "I've been tested in ways that are both publicly known and those that are not so well-known or not known at all. My faith and the support of any extended faith family, people whom I knew who were literally praying for me in prayer chains, who were prayer warriors for me, and people whom I didn't know, who I would meet or get a letter from, sustained me through a very difficult time."
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?"
Wallis: "Well, as you say, last night there were tough questions and it showed these candidates, faith for them is very personal and very real. And I think that's good for American politics and the churches to see that faith isn't on one side or the other. The Republicans this time have some difficulties with those issues on their side. And so, there is going to be a whole new conversation, I think, about the relation of faith and politics. I think it's a good thing that we don't see God on one side of the aisle or the other. Faith is personal and real and it must connect to the leading moral issues of the day and we should hold both sides accountable for that. The Republican side now is going to have to deal with the same set of questions and we're going to have a forum for them hopefully in the fall. I'm looking forward to the same conversation, not just whether a candidate has faith. We shouldn't have religious litmus tests in politics. It is important to know what a candidate's moral compass is. So we'll ask them, too, how their faith connects to the biggest moral issues of our time. Three billion people living on $2 a day is religious issue, and it's time we address that as people of faith around the world."
Roberts: "As you said, the conversation will continue. Reverend Jim Wallis, thank you very much."

Gumbel Brags He Was 'Correct' to Call
Conservative 'F**ing Idiot'

Former CBS Early Show host Bryant Gumbel, who in 2000 was infamously caught on camera calling a conservative activist a "f***ing idiot," defended and reaffirmed his comment while guest co-hosting on Tuesday's syndicated Live With Regis and Kelly. Discussing the possibility of inadvertently swearing on live television, a topic prompted by a federal court ruling reversing FCC fines on broadcasters for airing certain


| |
More See & Hear the Bias

vulgarities, Gumbel told co-host Kelly Ripa that he "was correct" when he used the F-word in reference to Robert Knight, then with the Family Research Council.

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-"
Gumbel: "Have you ever done one?"
Ripa: "Not yet!"
Gumbel: "I did one."
Ripa: "When?"
Gumbel: "When I was at CBS. And kind of surprising, I've been doing this 36 years. [Kelly adjusts his mug.] Thank you. I was wondering what I was drinking. And people who know me, guys who know me, are like, 'I'm amazed you never slipped up.'
Ripa: "Right."
Gumbel: "One time I was doing an interview with, I'm going to kindly describe him as a gentleman."
Ripa: "Okay."
Gumbel: "And he was arguing about how gays should be kept out of the Boy Scouts, etc. etc. And he was infuriating me."
Ripa: "Right. Of course."
Gumbel: "And I finished with the interview and I thought we had gone to commercial. And we hadn't. And I said, 'What a blanking idiot."
Ripa: "Oh, that's so, Oh!"
Gumbel: "I was correct, but it was wrong to do."

AP Reporter Sees 9-11 As 'Bush Admin
Conspiracy Hung on Al-Qaeda'

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