-Caveat Lector- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Richer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/1/18/140030.shtml > > WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! > > Dan Rather Tops Dishonor Awards > Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com > Saturday, Jan. 19, 2002 > WASHINGTON – To approving hoots, hollers and thunderous applause, hundreds of > activists Thursday night rated CBS anchorman Dan Rather the Most Outrageously > Biased Liberal Reporter for 2001. > Of the six Dishonors Awards bestowed at Media Research Center's annual > banquet, Rather won hands down in two categories: The Flakiest Comment of the > Year and the Sore Losers Award (for Refusing to Concede Bush’s Victory in > Florida). > > The Sore Losers Award, presented by syndicated columnist David Limbaugh, > spotlighted Rather’s coverage of Florida Secretary of State Katherine > Harris’ formal declaration that George W. Bush had indeed carried Florida. > > Dan Can't Handle the Truth > > The news clips showed the anchorman repeatedly telling his viewers that > "Republican" Harris was making a finding "as she sees it” or "as the > secretary of state sees it,” the clear implication being that this was a > partisan decision that bore no reality to facts. Unofficial recounts over the > following year, by liberal media outlets and others, have certified that yes, > Bush was the legitimate winner of Florida’s electoral votes. > > Harris herself appeared at the banquet Thursday and "congratulated” Rather > for winning the award. The Florida secretary of state, who is running for a > seat in Congress this year, said she merely followed the law and based her > declaration on the fact that the law "said what it said not what others > wanted it to say.” > > And as to the future, added Harris, well, as Dan would say, "Courage!” That > was a takeoff on Rather’s condescending, widely mocked signoff of his > newscast at a time of well-publicized turmoil at CBS.
Interesting what Rather later said on Letterman (reference: http://www.mediaresearch.org/news/cyberalert/2001/cyb20010918.asp#1 ): MRC analyst Brad Wilmouth took down a few quotes from Rather’s appearance. Letterman started by asking what had happened during the day. Rather replied: "Well, some very interesting things happened this afternoon. President Bush made what I think is his strongest statement yet when he went to the Pentagon this afternoon. He was ‘Giuliani-esque.’ I don’t think he’d mind my saying that, no. No, he looked the camera straight in the eye, unblinking, and said, ‘Osama: Dead or alive.’ And he also underscored, David, which I think is very important to understand, two things, and the President made this extremely clear. One, this is for the long haul. Wars are won by -- in no particular order -- firepower, willpower, and staying power. And what President Bush was talking about today, I don’t think he could have made it any clearer, that we have the firepower, we’ve mustered the willpower, and unlike the Gulf War, we will have the staying power. That’s the message you got out of that." A couple of minutes later Rather promised: "But I couldn’t feel stronger, David, that this is a time for us, and I’m not preaching about it, George Bush is the President. He makes the decisions, and, you know, it’s just one American, wherever he wants me to line up, just tell me where. And he’ll make the call." --- Wow, whatta limp-wristed, liberal thing to say! You would think Rush would be giving him a medal for the supposed turnaround, but it's much easier to dismiss him as a liberal. Give me a break. Dan Rather is no more a liberal than most journalists - most are centrist-capitalists, like most elected officials in the elephant and donkey parties. Fox News likes to complain about the liberal media, but that's not only untrue, but it's definitely disingenuous for them to turn around and claim unbiased reporting. O'Reilly is a heavy shade away from the "No-Spin Zone" he claims (reference: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,43077,00.html ): "Fox, on the other hand, consistently seeks out all points of view, including the conservative take on things. Since you rarely hear the right on the other established networks, of course Fox is going to seem tilted that way. But if you log it, just as much liberal opinion is presented here as conservative, and that's a fact, not an opinion." But what O'Reilly fails to acknowledge is that their power hitters - himself, Sean Hannity, John Gibson, Brit Hume - are all decidely conservative. And they have Shepard Smith, who does anchoring, not necessarily op-ed, but he's pretty transparently right wing. So is Peter Jennings. So is George Will. So is William F. Buckley. Many more ... NYT, National Review ... But what's disturbing about the whole liberal/conservative dichotomy argument in regards to reporting, besides the fact that both sides have taken up a business-oriented pro-war viewpoint within the last ten to twenty years - both terribly pleased with their patriotic duty to report whatever the government handlers want to dole out, is that neither side, certainly not the howling conservatives like Limbaugh as of late, would really want to hear the truth - he just wants conservative voices to override the liberals. That's not good journalism, either. And once you identify yourself with one side or the other in the argument, you loose sight of the actual facts, which is supposed to be the entire basis of journalism. Gretta Susteren and Geraldo are the token liberals no at Fox. Geraldo is an investigative reporter, not really a mouthpiece for a political bent. Geraldo likes to dramatize everything - that's his deal: sensationalism. Susteren is fairly sharp, and though perhaps not a radical, she is decidedly less conservative than most on Fox. Geraldo might have been called a liberal when he was working for 20/20 many years ago, but, frankly, I haven't seen it in him much as of late at all. Susteren was offered a boatload of money from Fox, and CNN is suffering due to Fox and MSNBC. But Fox still has no major op-ed liberal anchors of the likes of O'Reilly. Colmes is a joke. We'll see what they do with Gretta ... > In announcing the award, Limbaugh said the judges’ nomination of Rather was > based on merit "as we see it.” Yeah, I bet he neglected to mention Rather's pledge to line up for Bush. For shame, liberal journalists all, shame, shame, shame ... It's time for people like Limbaugh to stop crying wolf and to do some better legwork than meta-muckraking. He serves his purpose, I suppose, in that he delights those who want a sacrificial lamb without being a serious media researcher. But his accusations of bias ring a bit hollow, coming from that mouth ... You would think, given the lockstep media since 9-11, that he'd be dancing in the aisles. - jt <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
