The Liberal Patriot Blog
 The Liberal Patriot Blog is dedicated to collecting and sharing information about National and State [New Hampshire] Political Action, News, and Events.

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

Hard Balling the Bush Administration…..

Chris Matthews on Hard ball went after Matthew Dowd. It’s seem the Bushies have been using an interview between Kerry and Matthews to launch another slanderous ad against Kerry. They accuse him of claiming that he is “THE anti-war” candidate.

Not a big deal you say. Only it’s just not true.

Actually Kerry was answering a very specific question from Matthews regarding whether he was “ONE OF” the anti war candidates.

MATTHEWS: "Do you think you belong in that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war? The way it's been fought? Along with [then-Democratic presidential candidates] General [Wesley] Clark, along with [former Vermont governor] Howard Dean, and not necessarily in companionship politically on the issue of the war with people like [Senators Joseph] Lieberman, [John] Edwards, and [Richard] Gephardt? Are you one of the anti-war candidates?"

A good question since the war was going badly and the democrats were attacking Bush on it YET Kerry had voted for the war. Kerry answered,

KERRY: “I am. Yes. In the sense that I don't believe the president took to us war as he should have, yes. Absolutely. Do I think this president violated his promises to America? Yes, I do, Chris. Was there a way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable? You bet there was and we should have done it right.”

The Bushies used the interview in an ad and cut off everything AFTER “I am, yes”. They even added some pauses for good measure so it didn’t sound like it was edited.

Like I said in my earlier posts, this lets them use BOTH sides of the issue against Kerry. They can say to anti-Iraq war voters that Kerry voted for it and then say to pro-Iraq war voters that he claims to be “THE anti-war” candidate. Then also paint him as a flip flopper, some more.

GO TO MEDIA MATTERS for the full story AND to watch or listen to the interview between Chris Matthews and Republican National Committee (RNC) senior adviser Matthew Dowd.

Sunday, August 15, 2004

News Smear, ABC's The Note chimes in on the latest round.

In another desperate attempt to find something, anything AT ALL bad to say about John Kerry, the Right has latched on to a tiny figment of a speech and tried to spin it out of control. Here is that statement:

"I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history…"

They have honed in on the "more sensitive" part and kicked the spin machine into high gear! It started with this totally disingenious Cheney statement [surpirse surprise],

"Senator Kerry has also said that if he were in charge he would fight a "more sensitive" war on terror. America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive."

On ABC's The Note chimed in with "…the silliest thing John Kerry has said about national security since his "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it" classic."

That would be somewhat silly if:

1] It wasn't a totally mischaracterization of Kerry's larger statement [even of the full sentence].

2] The Bushies have said THE SAME THING!

Check out the Liberal Oasis Blog for more details on the developing smear campaign.

Below is the Email I sent to ABC which quotes Bush Administraion people using the word "Sensitive" applied to the war on terror:

In the course of a presidential election, candidates' access to the public is limited almost entirely to expensive ads and news shows. Yet you at ABC continue to abuse our public trust but putting out fallacious smears that, whether they are intended or not, will directly affect the outcome of our election. I am referring to the recent smears against John Kerry and recent remarks which include the word, "sensitive".

This presidential election will change the face of our democracy. Yet you allow the public airwaves which we have entrusted to you to be misused to promote a political agenda. I am sickened by The Note’s News Summery “A More Sensitive Note”. The typecasting of Al Gore by the media directly lead to the sorry state our nation is in today. We will no longer stand by while despicable propaganda is put out in the guise of news or a “balanced spectrum of opinions”. Most people already realize that mainstream news is garbage and have either sought other sources or quit paying attention at all. But this election has changed something that you haven’t caught on to yet. Those people are back.

But they are not back to merely listen and be misled by your cowardice journalism and partisan toadying. We are back and actively engaged with the complete understanding that you, the mainstream media, are too dishonest or incompetent to be heeded. But UNLIKE before, we are not going to sit back and get mad. We are going to demand that you take responsibility for your actions. Not merely those partisan shills at The Note but the corporations like ABC. We will hold you accountable for all the misinformation and abuse of truth that you allow [or promote].

We are on the brink of a national reaction against the abomination which is Fox News. Do you want to get caught in that mire? I will be boycotting ABC and encouraging my friends and family to do so as well. If you continue to abandon the tenets of objective journalism that arose when network television became the most powerful source of news, you will lose your audience and we will be held responsible. Do you, ABC, really want to sacrifice yourself to be a tool of partisan politics?

Since the people who work for you are either too ignorant to know or simply dishonest partisan hacks, let me help info you:

This was Kerry’s full statement: {{as quoted above}}

SILLY YOU SAY? How about these silly quotes?

{{The following iscopied from Liberal Oasis}}

We'll let the following post-9/11 quotes speak for themselves (emphasis added in all).
November 4, 2001Secretary Rumsfeld Media Availability with Pakistani Foreign Minister

Q: President Musharraf has repeatedly talked about an excess of hope for suspension of military operations, if they are not over, in the month of Ramadhan. Was this issue discussed today and what are your views on this?

RUMSFELD: I'm certainly aware of the views of the president of Pakistan and indeed the views of any number of countries across the globe.It is an important question and certainly an issue that all of us are sensitive to. The reality is that the threats of additional terrorist acts are there. They are credible, they are real, and they offer the prospects of still thousands of more people being killed. Our task is to certainly be sensitive to the views in the region, but also to see that we aggressively deal with the terrorist networks that exist.

Jan. 4, 2002Victoria Clarke News Briefing at Foreign Press Center in Washington, DC

THOMAS GORGUISSIAN, AL-WAFD, EGYPT: ...[Are] you doing any kind of estimate or guessing how the rest of the world is looking to this war?...

CLARKE: …are we listening to what is going on around the world? Absolutely. Absolutely. We could not do this alone, so we are constantly working with, consulting with, talking with literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people around the world from over a hundred countries on how the best way to prosecute this war. I think one of the reasons for the success thus far has been that kind of extraordinary sensitivity. And to say in a very non-patronizing way, we appreciate whatever you can do to contribute to this effort. And far be it for us to tell you that it's all or nothing, or you have to let us completely run the show and you have to let us say whatever we want to say about your country's contributions.I think it's been an extraordinarily sensitive appreciation that different countries have different concerns and needs -- appreciate and value that they share with us this desire to root out terrorism and work with them in a very flexible fashion.So we are extraordinarily sensitive to that, and I think that's what's contributed to the success thus far.

October 31, 2001Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Interview with Al Jazeera

Q: …you consider it also a political decision that the consequences of continuing [military operations] through Ramadan with your troops in Pakistan, where people would be outraged or other places in the Muslim and Arab world.Of course, you know that President Mubarak and others called for this kind of a truce.

MYERS: Right. And I would just say that we are, I think, very culturally sensitive.We go to the leaders at the political level and at the military level, and ask for their advice.So actions we will take I think will be consistent with that advice.But we're not unaware and we're not insensitive. These are important issues.

November 19, 2003Stakeout on Capitol Hill After U.S. Senate Briefing

Q: …can you address this question about the military utility and the risks that are inherent in going after targets, the more intensified bombing, the risk increases of collateral damage despite all the care that goes into that.

MYERS: ...The commanders on the ground are responsible for the tactics.They are very sensitive to the balance between appropriate military action and not trying to turn the average Iraqi against the coalition.So they work this very hard.They have taken great steps to minimize collateral damage and I think they’ve done a superb job as I understand it.

Nov. 9, 2001Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Radio Networks

Q: ...can I pick up on the Ramadan issue? We know that you and your colleagues have said there's no question of a pause in the terrorist campaign and I understand that.We understand you can't say what you're going to do in advance.But are you nevertheless open to some sort of gesture? We noticed for example that you did not bomb on the first Friday of the campaign.Is it still possible, bearing in mind enormous sensitivity in the Muslim world, that something might be possible, can you give us a hint that you might be --

WOLFOWITZ: I think we've made it clear we're going to be sensitive to the fact that Ramadan is the holiest month on the Muslim calendar and we will have that in mind.We're not going to write a blueprint for the Taliban or al Qaeda or the people that we're after to say oh, now you not only know that mosques are safe but these other sanctuaries are sanctuaries you can operate in.But we will be sensitive.

(UPDATE 8/13 7:45 AM ET -- Readers are noting the omission of two key Dubya "sensitive" quotes, one from last week -- "in terms of the balance between running down intelligence and bringing people to justice obviously is -- we need to be very sensitive on that" and one from 3/01 -- "we must be sensitive about expressing our power and influence".)

{{End of Quote from Liberal Oasis}}

ABC: Please hire some journalists or at least fire the ring wing shills that have sleazed their way into your legitimate news rooms.

One of Many,

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?