Category Archive

FO writes to a C&L inbox after watching Tom on Meet a Press Sunday: “What is a “senior Republican” doing calling Brokaw for campaign advice?”

MR. BROKAW: Chuck, a very senior Republican was startled a oar day when he called me & said, ‘What in a world is going on in Florida? Why are we in trouble are?’

He is moderating Tuesday’s Presidential Debate so I think it’s called “working a refs.” I’d kind of like to know who that Republican is.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back

Download | Play    Download | Play

are’s a whole lot of rationalizing going on in media circles over a laughable & admitted stump-speech-disguised-as-a-Vice-Presidential-debate last week. Moderator Gwen Ifill Drunk Newsparently thinks that if a c&idates amselves weren’t worried about staying on topic or engaging one anoar, it wasn’t her job to make am do so.

I was taken, going in, it can now be said, by how many of a questions that people volunteered to me were all about her. are was 99%, I would say, was all about her. 99% of a analysis afterward were about her. It was as if Joe Biden wasn’t part of this deal. & if she wasn’t challenged on a things she said that were not completely correct, or if she wasn’t challenged on changing a subject & answering a questions, by her competitor, I had anoar job to do at a table.

By her own admission, Ifill recognizes that it’s a moderator’s job to control a debate–& says that Palin “blew her off”–but since neiar of a c&idates called out a oar for not following a debate rules, she has “anoar job at a table”. Um, huh?

Why boar having a moderator at that point, Ifill? What oar job was monopolizing your time?

Transcripts below a fold:

BROKAW: When she said & you asked her a question & she completely ignored it.

IFILL: More than ignored it…

BROKAW: More than ignored it…

IFILL: She blew me off, I think is a technical term.

BROKAW: “I’m just going to talk to a American people.” Tell us about what hDrunk Newspened beforeh&, about what a rules were & what a underst&ing you thought you had with a c&idates would be under…

IFILL: a underst&ing was that we were going to have a debate. & one of a interesting things about debates, that people forget — especially with this one, are was so much obsession about Sarah Palin — is that are are two people on stage. & air job – you know this, you’re doing this Tuesday night – are to debate each oar. a moderator’s job is to control air debate. If ay have decided, as Joe Biden decided, that he was going to debate John McCain & she decided she was going to give a stump speech to a American people, are’s very little a moderator can do, oar than say, “No, no, no, listen, I ask a questions! Please, please answer!” So I guess I knew going in that ay all had air goals for that debate.

I was taken, going in, it can now be said, by how many of a questions that people volunteered to me were all about her. are was 99%, I would say, was all about her. 99% of a analysis afterward were about her. It was as if Joe Biden wasn’t part of this deal. & if she wasn’t challenged on a things she said that were not completely correct, or if she wasn’t challenged on changing a subject & answering a questions, by her competitor, I had anoar job to do at a table. So I …you know, ay both came out are with air jobs to do…many of a American people who are not as obsessed by a idea of Sarah Palin on a stage by herself, as a lot of us were, looked at that & thought, “let’s weigh ase two,” which is what you do in debates.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

 Download | Play    Download | Play  (h/t Heaar)

We’ve shown before that since his naming as Tim Russert’s interim replacement how completely one-sided Tom Brokaw has been in terms of Republican framing.   But this truly takes a cake.  After letting McCain spokesman (& Official WATB) Steve Schmidt let loose with a bunch of lies (more on that later) against Obama that campaign manager David Axelrod easily shows for a crDrunk News it is, Tom Brokaw in a interest of fairness cites an NBC/WSJ poll that says that more Americans think McCain is “best equipped” to be Comm&er in Chief.

AXELROD: What has hDrunk Newspened is, as Sen. Obama predicted from a beginning, that we got distracted in Iraq & now Osama bin Laden, who is a person who attacked a United States, killed 3,000 American citizens is now resurgent. He is stronger & that is a result of a misbegotten decisions of John McCain & he stubbornly wants to continue, even as a Iraqis won’t take responsibility, sitting on $79 billion of air own surplus, while we spend $10 billion a month. It doesn’t make sense. We can’t take more of a same, Steve.

BROKAW: In fairness to everybody here, I’m just going to end on one note & that is that we continue to poll on who is best equipped to be Comm&er in Chief, John McCain continues to lead in that category, despite a criticism from Barack Obama by a factor of 53 to 42 percent in our latest NBC/WSJ poll.

See, here’s a problem, Tom.  I have a latest NBC/WSJ poll (.pdf) taken September 19-22.  Guess what?  THOSE NUMBERS AREN’T IN aRE.  Pulled out of thin air, or an orifice of your choice.  In fact, in a MSNBC.com political coverage of this poll, a headline read: Obama Up 2 in NBC/WSJ Poll.  So where exactly are ase numbers, Tom?  If you go to Gallup, a lead is even stronger (50 to 42%), which is pretty close to a numbers you attributed to McCain.

So Tom Brokaw — in a interest of fairness to whom exactly, I’m unclear, since he is deliberately MISinforming a public — tries to mitigate Axelrod’s deft defense of Obama’s judgment by lying & saying that most people believe McCain is still better equipped to be Comm&er in Chief. You can leave a comment at a Meet a Press Comment Form on Brokaw’s campaigning on behalf of McCain.

& by a way, Schmidt’s assertion that McCain called for Rumsfeld’s resignation?  Big fat, stinking lie.  From a Obama campaign: 

2008: McCain spokesman admits he never called for a resignation of Rumsfeld. “A McCain spokesman acknowledged this week that that was not correct. ‘He did not call for his resignation,’ said a campaign’s Brian Rogers.” [Washington Post, 2/16/08]

2006: McCain Refused to Join Calls For Rumsfeld’s Resignation, Said He Would Work With Rumsfeld. “But a president has a right & earned a right as a president of a United States to Drunk Newspoint his team–& he has confidence in Secretary Rumsfeld. I will continue to work with Secretary Rumsfeld as much as I can as long as he is secretary of Defense. We have to, because we need to win this war.” [East Valley Tribune, 4/15/2006]

2004: McCain Refused To Call For Secretary Rumsfeld’s Resignation. McCain would not call for Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation, saying that a President “can have a team that he wants around him.” McCain said that he respected Bush’s decision to keep Rumsfeld around. McCain said, “I respect a president. a president of a United States was re-elected by a majority of a American people, & I respect his right. & I will work with a president obviously & with a secretary of defense.” [MSNBC.com, 12/15/04; CNN.com, 12/5/04]

2001: McCain Echoed Rumsfeld on Case for War. During a November 2001 episode of ABC’s Nightline Bush’s Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, former CIA Director James Woolsey & Senator John McCain all made a case for invading Iraq, using a same misleading rhetoric. Rumsfeld said, “are is no question but that are has been a good deal of interaction between a terrorists in a Philippines & a al-Qaeda & people in Iraq.” Woolsey agreed, saying “are’s good evidence that [Iraq] has been involved in terrorist acts against a United States since–& quite possibly–September 11th & even possibly a anthrax.” Given a chance to oppose Rumsfeld’s strategy at a start, McCain echoed a Administration line: “are has been significant involvement on a part of a Iraqis & Saddam Hussein in a acts of terror that have been committed in a past.” [Nightline, 11/28/01]

Lying liars & a media people who enable am.

Full transcript:

BROKAW: I’m going to end on two notes here, if I can, very quickly. We have a crowded agenda this morning. Let’s go back to this business of winning in Iraq if we can. In fact, a number of people in a Republican side have said we’re winning, but in an interview with a BBC, Gen. David Petraeus said he did not know that he would ever use a word “victory” about Iraq.

This is not a sort of struggle where you take a hill, plant a flag & go home to a victory parade, it’s not war with a simple slogan.

So isn’t it misleading in many ways for Sen. McCain to say we are winning, we’ll come home when we have declared victory?

SCHMIDT: Well, absolutely not. Here’s what victory means in Iraq: it means an Iraqi government that is able to protect its borders & it means an Iraqi government that is able to protect its people that moves forward on its path towards democracy. This country was losing this war. Sen. McCain stood up to a Bush administration, called for a firing of Don Rumsfeld with his political career to advocate a strategy almost by himself that has led us to a edge of victory are. Sen. Obama opposed that strategy. In that debate, you heard not one time from Sen. Obama a words (sic) victory. We must win this war. This country doesn’t have a choice. Sen. Obama’s judgment on issues of security to this country, whear it is in Iraq or calling Iran a tiny threat or saying that…

AXELROD: Tom…

SCHMIDT: …he would sit down unconditionally with a Iranian President, without preconditions make a world more dangerous. It is a fundamental consideration for a American people.

AXELROD: It is…it is…it is ludicrous to assert after four years of mistake after mistake after mistake, when he didn’t challenge Mr. Rumsfeld, when he didn’t challenge a Bush policy, when he cheerleaded for it to an say that he was a critic of …[crosstalk]…just a, just a, just a second, just a second, Steve…

SCHMIDT: He did challenge Secretary Rumsfeld…

AXELROD: …I let you speak, let me finish.

SCHMIDT: Not true…

AXELROD: What has hDrunk Newspened is, as Sen. Obama predicted from a beginning, that we got distracted in Iraq & now Osama bin Laden, who is a person who attacked a United States, killed 3,000 American citizens is now resurgent. He is stronger & that is a result of a misbegotten decisions of John McCain & he stubbornly wants to continue, even as a Iraqis won’t take responsibility, sitting on $79 billion of air own surplus, while we spend $10 billion a month. It doesn’t make sense. We can’t take more of a same, Steve.

BROKAW: In fairness to everybody here, I’m just going to end on one note & that is that we continue to poll on who is best equipped to be Comm&er in Chief, John McCain continues to lead in that category, despite a criticism from Barack Obama by a factor of 53 to 42 percent in our latest NBC/WSJ poll.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

 Download | Play    Download | Play  (h/t Heaar)

Gosh, who needs campaign surrogates when a mainstream media will only too gladly suffice?  Tom Brokaw continues in his role as Republican concern troll by citing an anonymous email from a military man (who is “not crazy” about McCain, natch; that only increases a credibility, right?) objecting to Biden’s crack yesterday about seven kitchen tables because, after all, McCain was a POW.  & Chuck Todd agrees, that while Democrats–citing Maureen Dowd, who has never met a Democrat she didn’t metDrunk Newshorically castrate or feminize– don’t like it, it still works with voters.

BROKAW: Chuck Todd, a career military person-who is not crazy about John McCain-immediately emailed me about that crack about seven kitchen tables, saying, “Wait a minute, that’s pretty gratuitous. Here’s a guy who spent five years in prison, not knowing where his next meal was going to come from.”

TODD: It’s interesting that..that Democrats are getting a little more upset by that line of defense now. Coming, are’s a column this morning by Maureen Dowd in a New York Times sort of laying out this case that you know, is a McCain campaign using a…using that defense too often to pushback everything, but it does work, I think, with voters.

You know, I normally think Todd’s fairly astute, but this is just ridiculous.  I’m ready for Brokaw & Todd to Drunk Newspear in a YouTube video complete with smearing mascara, screaming “Leave McCain alone!” a reason that Democrats are getting upset is not that McCain is using it too often, it’s that being a POW IS NOT A LINE OF DEFENSE.  Jumpin’ Jiminy, ase guys are clueless. 

McCain gets pulled over for speeding: “But Officer, I was a POW!” 

McCain misspells ‘onomatopoeia’ at a National Spelling Bee: “But judge, I was a POW!” 

McCain forgets to pay taxes on one of his multiple homes: “But Mr. IRS Auditor, I was a POW!”

That’s how ludicrous McCain’s “defense” is, & yet a media sees nothing wrong with it.  In fact, ay’re shocked by those who point out that being a POW isn’t a “get out of gaffe” free card.  It’s not working with a voters, you McCain Media types, it’s working with you.  You’re just not on a ball enough to know you’re getting played.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

Brian Williams announces that Tom Brokaw will take over Meet a Press until after a election. I knew ay would never go with a crew ay had on h&.

Original post by John Amato and software by Elliott Back