Kurtz: Fox News is ‘entitled’ to ‘misinform our society.’
On Wednesday, during an appearance on Glenn Beck’s CNN Headline News show, Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz said that Fox News is “entitled” to be “a cheerleader for the Bush administration” that is “misinforming our society.” Kurtz’s comments came in the context of dismissing the criticisms of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, who routinely mocks the cable news network. Watch it:
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
92 Responses to “Kurtz: Fox News is ‘entitled’ to ‘misinform our society.’”
Register
RSSLogin
View Most Popular
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Clinton
Drudge
Earmarks
Economy
Environment
Ethics
Feith
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Gore
Graham
Hagee
Health Care
Housing
Immigration
Impeachment
Iran
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Petraeus
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rice
Rove
Sports
Third Bush Term
Torture
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Think Progress is ‘entitled’ to ‘misinform our society too.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:20 amKurtz is idiot numero uno. And it reflects very poorly on the Post that they employ this poor excuse for a media “critic.”
September 14th, 2007 at 11:21 amwait, i thought FIXED NEWS was fair and balanced….
yeah!
September 14th, 2007 at 11:21 amKurtz told the truth about FOX news > they are GOPer propaganda network only.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:25 amIf pressed I am sure Kurtz would also think its ok to wear a brown shirt and an armband proclaiming your political affiliation.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:25 amSo we’re not entitled to real news, Kurtz? They’re intitled to lie to us when they claim to be a news organization, rather than a propaganda organ?
It’s nice to see that you take journalistic integrity so seriously….
September 14th, 2007 at 11:25 amComment by Ringo — September 14, 2007 @ 11:20 am
Wrongo! Dawg! Howza Neuticlesâ„¢ workin’ out fer ya? Mr P ‘n Li’l Foot swear by ‘em, said they made ‘em fell almost like a man, er, dog, er, boy again!
September 14th, 2007 at 11:25 amA new low in broadcast journalism.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:27 amBeck is such a slob/loser, why do these conservative pundits all have that smarmy, un-enlightened frat boy, locked in 1 belief, GOP water carrier, Rush is my hero look???
We all know FOX misinforms, all of us except their core audience. THINK, if the mainstream media is sooooo liberal, Clinton would not have been impeached, Gore would have been president twice and 9/11 probaly would never have happened. BUT, I digress, fair and balanced, MY AS*.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:28 amFox news is DESIGNED to ‘misinform our society’.
So are trolls, by the way.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:28 amBetter watch the clip one more time. Kurtz disagrees with olbermann’s comments and says he doesn’t subscribe to the view of Fox as cheerleader for the Bush Admin. Nice try, TP. Some of us are actually paying attention.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:29 amPoor Howard Kurtz. Doesn’t believe in anything anymore. Just another Washington values cynic.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:29 am#
Think Progress is ‘entitled’ to ‘misinform our society too.
Comment by Ringo — September 14, 2007 @ 11:20 am
#
Think Progress makes no secret of its bias. It’s right there in the name. If you come to TP, you know immediately that this is a left-wing liberal site. Fox, however, claims to be “fair and balanced.”
September 14th, 2007 at 11:30 amthe mainstream media should be renamed the Joseph Goebbels Memorial Propaganda Ministry.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:31 amone of the most high-profile media critics endorses disinformation and propaganda from a leading media organization.
my, how journalistic standards have devolved.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:31 amIf that’s the case (Kurtz acknowledging Fox’s INTENTIONAL deception), then Fox should be required to run an “editorial” disclamer beneath every broadcast.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:32 amActually, Fox is not entitled to be a GOP cheerleader. That would make it fall under PAC rules or be subject to the rules governing political fundraising.
During the Cold War there was a term for organizations such as Fox: it was a Front. Many NGOs were discredited by being exposed as Fronts for the Communist Party and legit NGOs were slandered with the same accusation or tarred with the charge of “aiding and abetting”.
Fox is a Front for the GOP.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:32 amMr Kurtz: “The horror, the horror!”
September 14th, 2007 at 11:33 amOf course the fact that his wife is a repukkke party hack doesn’t disqualify him from being an ombudsperson is proof of how low journamalism has sunk. What’s worse is that for the repukkke party, it’s always party before country - it’s a freaking football game to these idiots while good kids die and are maimed for the biggest nothing since Vietnam. They are sociopathic and have no morals.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:33 am“Which one makes you weep more for journalism?”
Beck, you arrogant tool. No one thinks you’re a journalist, so whatever you do doesn’t reflect on journalism. You are giving arrogant tools a bad name, though.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:34 amalmost paul
he says that he disagrees with olbermann’s assessment AND agrees that they are entitled to be that way.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:34 amThink Progress is ‘entitled’ to ‘misinform our society too.
Comment by Ringo — September 14, 2007 @ 11:20 am
Yes, because a political blog is identical to a news network. Nice call, doofus.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:35 am“That’s what he’s doing!” - …Right, Glen Beck. Believe what you want.
And even if Kurtz says that Fox News isn’t peddling in it, he still says that they’re entitled to do so. Which is BS through and through, and shows how much Kurtz REALLY thinks about journalistic ethics, and the importance of objective news.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:35 amI wonder if Faux News will cover this new GOP gay scandal?? Check it out - it’s a real tangled web involving murder perhaps?
http://pamshouseblend.com/frontPage.do
September 14th, 2007 at 11:35 amIs Foch Snooze still on the air? Could have fooled me!
September 14th, 2007 at 11:36 amWho combs his hair like that?
September 14th, 2007 at 11:36 am#17 comment makes a good point. Seems the dems should get out and push this - they are a front for the gop. During last night’s speech fox ran this underneath gwb jr.: Iraq The Way Forward - Where does crap like that come from but repukkke party flacks and hacks!
September 14th, 2007 at 11:36 amAnd they dare to call Kurtz’s show “Reliable Sources.”
September 14th, 2007 at 11:36 am#11: Sorry “paul“, some of us ARE paying attention. Kurtz clears states that he believes Fox “has the right” to misinform.
And Beck’s final comment about his playing fast & loose with the truth: “At least I am admit it”, speaks volumes about his own journalistic “integrity” (or lack thereof).
September 14th, 2007 at 11:36 amSorry! Wrong Scandal link. Here’s the one on John McHenry:
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2933
September 14th, 2007 at 11:37 amComment by gummitch — September 14, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Yeah, I mean, Fox News has NOWHERE near the kind of audience Think Progress does, and TP always steals the good seats at the White House Pressers. Oh, and don’t forget the exclusive interviews with people like the Honorable David Petraeus.
….wait….
September 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amComment by troqua — September 14, 2007 @ 11:36 am
Hey, it works. Look how ‘Fair And Balanced’ is.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:39 amrazzle, that’s an incredibly intriguing story. Can’t wait for more! Check out Mike Rogers‘ take on it, with many more links.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:39 amSo Howard, are YOU entitled to lie to us? Do you feel that way? Do you believe that?
September 14th, 2007 at 11:39 amThen why should we believe anything you say?
Chris L: Exactly!
Crooksandliars,moveon,americablog,thinkprogress… we all freely say we’re LIBERAL sites. We intend to give the LIBERAL perspective.
Sites like therant.us freely say they give the CONSERVATIVE side. Which they do.
Fox News claims it’s ‘fair and balanced’. It’s NOT. It’s the conservative viewpoint. If they claimed they were the ‘Conservative News Network’, that’d be fine. They’d be accomplishing their goals. Saying their ‘fine and balanced’ is a LIE. That’s what I have a problem with.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:39 amIn many ways, FOX is a troll. Every syllable is propaganda. In the very rare occasion that a story DOESN’T have a right-wing slant, a part of the intent of the story is to convince you that they aren’t a propaganda network. It’s like Jake D saying something reasonable; it merely a ploy to make you think he actually exists.
FOX is the end result of the demise of the fairness doctrine; it is what was planned to take advantage of the change. Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch will never have your best interests at heart.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:40 amThen why should we believe anything you say?
Because he has a show that’s called “Reliable Sources”. Isn’t that much more reliable sounding then a man called ‘Olbermann’ and ‘Countdown’, something that sounds more like a timer for a bombohmygod, Olbermann’s a sleeper agent for Al Qaida! Quick, someone call that journalistic bastion Glenn Beck!
September 14th, 2007 at 11:41 amThe only show of its kind with lower ratings than Beck is Tucker.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:43 amFox would be better off doing two things..
1) Getting Jurtz over as an employee TODAY.
2) Have the FCC re-classify Fox as a “propaganda outlet”…
Then they could just talk to themselves and leave us alone!!!
September 14th, 2007 at 11:44 amBOOOORRRRIIIIIINNNNGGGGG! Next news item please.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:44 amWhat is the point of having a “media critic” like Mr. Kurtz if news organizations have the right to misinform the public?
September 14th, 2007 at 11:46 amHmmmm?
U.S. develops 14-ton super bomb, bigger than Russian vacuum bomb:
http://en.rian.ru/world/20070913/78518873.html
WASHINGTON, September 13 (RIA Novosti) - The U.S. has a 14-ton super bomb more destructive than the vacuum bomb just tested by Russia, a U.S. general said Wednesday.
The statement was made by retired Lt. General McInerney, chairman of the Iran Policy Committee, and former Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force.
McInerney said the U.S. has “a new massive ordnance penetrator that’s 30,000 pounds, that really penetrates … Ahmadinejad has nothing in Iran that we can’t penetrate.”
He also said the new Russian bomb was not a “penetrator.”
On Tuesday, the Fox News television channel said: “A recent decision by German officials to withhold support for any new sanctions against Iran has pushed a broad spectrum of officials in Washington to develop potential scenarios for a military attack on the Islamic regime.”.
Commenting on the report, McInerney said: “Since Germany has backed out of helping economically, we do not have any other choice. … They’ve forced us into the military option.”
McInerney described some possible military campaign scenarios and said: “The one I favor the most, of course, is an air campaign,” he continued.
He said that bombing would be launched by 65-70 stealth bombers and 400 bombers of other types.
“Forty-eight hours duration, hitting 2500 aimed points to take out their [Iranian] nuclear facilities, their air defense facilities, their air force, their navy, their Shahab-3 retaliatory missiles, and finally their command and control. And then let the Iranian people take their country back,” the general said describing the campaign, adding it would be “easy.”
September 14th, 2007 at 11:46 amHaha, looks like some people feel threatened by Olbermann’s continued climb on the success ladder.
~Sean
September 14th, 2007 at 11:47 amComment by squid696 — September 14, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Because you’re assured that you’re getting the right news. It’s better than a guy who goes on cable and interviews people and has a little success. Or…something, I lost track of the coherency in Kurtz line, if there was any to be found.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:47 am“p” is an especially desperate troll character who is panicing in order to stifle discussion.
“Misinforming Society” could well be considered FRAUD. Indeed, it is useful to consider the whole Iraq war and how it was “sold” to the American public as FRAUD, to the tune of 1 trillion dollars and counting.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:50 amHoward Kurtz can suck on this, as Friedman would say.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:50 amComment by Peter C — September 14, 2007 @ 11:50 am
It’s only misinforming society when it goes against the accepted, White House-approved reality that’s been so painstakingly crafted for your security.
After all, who needs the truth when you’re ’safe’?
September 14th, 2007 at 11:52 amNews and journalism deal with facts. So a news channel is entitled to have its own facts, now? When are the so-called “media critics” like Kurtz going to start being critical? Maybe Kurtz should change the name of his job profile to that of “media cheerleader”.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:55 amOff topic, but oops, another one gone.
Regina B. Schofield, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs, has announced her resignation from the Department of Justice, effective September 28, 2007.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:56 amWrong.
When FOX misslabels the party affiliation of politicians they don’t like it is clearly breaking the law.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:58 amI don’t get it, the clip actually supports Beck and Fox more than it does Keith Olbermann?
September 14th, 2007 at 11:59 am#
I wonder if Faux News will cover this new GOP gay scandal?? Check it out - it’s a real tangled web involving murder perhaps?
http://pamshouseblend.com/frontPage.do
Comment by razzle — September 14, 2007 @ 11:35 am
September 14th, 2007 at 12:00 pmOnly if there is a blonde with big boobs and lots of footage involved.
I’d like to see the percentage numbers compairing FOX’s lack of coverage of the actual war compaired with the HUGE amount of air time granted to sell the Presidents surge of the war. It’s almost funny how on a daily basis they all but ignore that we’re even in a war, but have spent almost all of their news time these past few weeks pandering to Bush/Patreus with nonstop coverage of how great the war that they seem to have all but forgotten about is going.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:02 pmI don’t get it, the clip actually supports Beck and Fox more than it does Keith Olbermann?\
….wait, what?
September 14th, 2007 at 12:07 pmFox is such a propaganda network, and so vile and anti american that I have it blocked at my house - my ignorant in-laws keep trying to tune in to it and I tell them that this is a Propaganda Free Zone. And yes I don’t do Progressive talk with them either.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:11 pmKurtz says Fox “News” is entitled to misinform. WH gives Fox “News” misinformation. Fox “News” reports the misinformation. Public sees through misformation, says WH has no credibility. WH points at press and says press is at fault because they are reporting misinformation, ignoring the fact that they are the ones who provided the misinformation. Kurtz says its okay to be a cheerleader. Process starts all over again.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:14 pmKryptik. poorchoice is right. view the clip one more time; then question TP for posting it. It downplays the partisan attacks of fox at the expense of olbermann and progressive attacks on fox.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:17 pmI watched it again. And he flat out says that the argument Olbermann makes is that Fox News helps disseminate falsehoods for the administration trying to mislead people…and then says ‘But you know what, they’re entitled to do that!’
That doesn’t sound like he’s downplaying the attacks, he sounds like he’s saying ‘what’s the point, they’re allowed to misinform people!’
September 14th, 2007 at 12:30 pmIf no one questions Fox News on their coverage of say, Anna Nicole Smith’s saga, or Michael Jackson’s pedophile trials, why should any one believe that factual information is what they provide. They provide entertainment, just like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. People in dark recessed states of denial simple don’t want to be bothered with details about something that might actually affect their lives. Fox News is a cartoon show sans the animation. They claim to be fair and balanced , not factual and skeptical. I think it’s great that people are lazy and don’t care about the truth and how it’s manipulated. Read folks. It’s where you can look at the facts plainly and not be swooned by the sparkly delivery of an over bearing authoritarian wannabe or a compliant barbie doll giggle box. Maybe TP should offer a bigger type size for the seniors who are too lazy to put on their glasses and audio stream for the GOP knuckle draggers who can’t read. No editorial just facts. Offer something as an alternative to the lazy Lima Beans.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:34 pmPaul: “Better watch the clip one more time. Kurtz disagrees with olbermann’s comments and says he doesn’t subscribe to the view of Fox as cheerleader for the Bush Admin. Nice try, TP. Some of us are actually paying attention.”
Paul, if YOU were paying any attention at all, you might have noticed that Rupert Murdock himself admitted to a British interviewer earlier this year that he started Fox News to “push the republican agenda.” I don’t even know why there is an argument anymore. Murdoch settled the argument. Fox News is NOT a legitimate news outlet. It is a propaganda arm for the repub party. The boss says so himself.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:42 pmthe press is indispensable to a democracy ,where only an informed citizenry can hope to control the mechanisms of governments and there by their own lives ! The disdain which is displayed by so called conservatives toward a free press and TRUTH is terrifying as is their desire ,it would seem ,to do away with the US constitution and Jeffersonian democracy in general .
September 14th, 2007 at 12:57 pmHabeas Corpus ,domestic spying , WARRANTLESS wiretapping ,surveillance of American citizens ,SIGNING STATEMENTS,torture,extraordinary rendition ,The concentration of the MSM into fewer and fewer corporate hands ,ect …..
Not alot of gray area folks ,American fascism in full bloom !
Oh did I forget to mention 3/4 of a million deaths for control of oil ?
Isn’t it cute to watch the stupid dog having such fun chasing it’s own tail?
“Good boy Paul! Good boy!!”
September 14th, 2007 at 1:06 pmMr Kurtz thanks for going on record and clarifying your views on journalistic integrity! You will be remembered ,in light of this view,as an important supporter of the very lies which cost the lives of so many innocents and American soldiers !
September 14th, 2007 at 1:08 pmZeig Heil !
Beck could not carry KO’s jock. Beck a loser Mormon(the racist religion) loooks more like Opie.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:31 pmFox news is a propaganda arm of the republican party.
End of story.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:35 pmwe might, as americans, want to remind him that the FCC and the charter for television broadcast says differently.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:47 pmit has been gutted with idiots and patrons appointed by this administration, but the laws are being violated none the less. we might consider our do nothing congress again, and thank them for the diligent work on this and other matters.
Isn’t it cute to watch the stupid dog having such fun chasing it’s own tail?
“Good boy Paul! Good boy!!â€
Comment by RepublicansAreFascists — September 14, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
If I didn’t have any valid arguments, I’d probably attack you with name calling, too. Luckily, for me, I’ve got more to say.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:54 pmpaul: “Luckily, for me, I’ve got more to say.”
Yes, you could simply agree that Fox News is a propaganda arm for the republican party because the boss, Rupert Murdoch, admitted to it. That would be honest of you. Is that too much to expect?
September 14th, 2007 at 1:58 pmThink Progress makes no secret of its bias. It’s right there in the name. If you come to TP, you know immediately that this is a left-wing liberal site. Fox, however, claims to be “fair and balanced.â€
Comment by Chris L — September 14, 2007 @ 11:30 am
TP does not, however, have a disclaimer noting that they regularly put misleading titles and/or quotes in their threads. It’s interesting that they felt comfortable enough putting misleading information in a thread accusing someone else of misinforming people. ;)
September 14th, 2007 at 2:01 pmHere you go, Paul, from the Wall Street Journal:
Asked if his News Corp. managed to shape the agenda on the war in Iraq, Murdoch said: “No, I don’t think so. We tried.” Asked by Rose for further comment, he said: “We basically supported the Bush policy in the Middle East…”
Paul, if you understand the definition of journalism, you must see that Murdoch is admitting here that Fox News is not a legitimate news organization.
September 14th, 2007 at 2:03 pm#47 …After all, who needs the truth when you’re ’safe’?
Comment by Kryptik — September 14, 2007 @ 11:52 am
Yup we are much safer now, except Betrayus couldn’t seem to answer that question clearly……..just makes you feel so comfy doesn’t it knowing these are the people in charge, I know I will sleep much better knowing that. I wonder if that response was the accepted WH version of correct info!
September 14th, 2007 at 2:08 pmupright left, for you to try to make equivalency arguments comparing TP and Fox News, is just short of stark, raving mad. Fox News is the largest cable news organization in the country. TP is a liberal blog.
Very weak.
September 14th, 2007 at 2:10 pmGood job trying to redirect. Listen again. He clearly says that he does not agree with Olbermann’s assessment, but then he says “but, you know what? they are entitled to do that!” See it’s the “but” there that makes him actually say “I don’t agree, but even if they do, they are entitled to.” He’s certainly not saying Olbermann is a “they” and he’s certainly not saying he was quoting Olbermann saying “but they are entitled to do that” so that leaves only the logical conclusion that he’s a conservative market-corrects-all fundy (aka the misguided poor saps who call themselves “Libertarians”) who may not personally believe Fox is deceiving, but even if they were, it’s their “freedom” to do so, under the law.
YOU try again.
September 14th, 2007 at 2:11 pmTHINK, if the mainstream media is sooooo liberal, Clinton would not have been impeached, Gore would have been president twice….
Comment by Texasjuice — September 14, 2007 @ 11:28 am
You would be correct if the liberal media chose the president and decided whether he should be impeached. ;)
September 14th, 2007 at 2:11 pmupright: “You would be correct if the liberal media chose the president and decided whether he should be impeached.”
You’ve got to admit that media plays a major roll in public opinion. How is it that many of us got the idea that Gore was a liar or a “serial exaggerator” if not though the media. How is it that people got the idea that Bush was a “regular guy” and “plain spoken.” Who gave Americans the idea that Bush was a “compassionate conservative?”
Why did people think that Gore said he invented the internet? Why did people think that Clinton had done something wrong with his Whitewater land deal?
September 14th, 2007 at 2:29 pmWhy did people think that Gore said he invented the internet? Why did people think that Clinton had done something wrong with his Whitewater land deal?
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — September 14, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
Gore:
http://article.nationalreview.com/ ?q=ZmExMjFlNzFmNWM5YWYwYzBiNWFmOTMzNmExOTkzZDU=
Clinton:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-srv/ politics/ special/ whitewater/ timeline.htm
This is why people think what they do about Gore and Clinton. I disagree with their political views, but I don’t think they are significantly more or less corrupt than the average politician. With the possible exception of Clinton’s choice to use his postion to take advantage of a starstruck young woman, disregarding the effects such a thing could have on her future.
As for Bush, put a rich man on a ranch in a cowboy hat, and everybody thinks he’s Ben Cartwright. ;)
September 14th, 2007 at 2:58 pmThis is exactly why I cancelled my subscription to the Washington Post Weekly. To many “right wing lover” report and write for that news-paper.
September 14th, 2007 at 3:19 pmThis is exactly why I cancelled my subscription to the Washington Post Weekly. To many “right wing lover†report and write for that news-paper.
Comment by marcus robinson — September 14, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
And I had to cancel my New Republic subscription because of all the kneejerk liberal reporters. ;)
September 14th, 2007 at 3:52 pmcan’t wait to hear olbermann’s reply to these two ass clowns….and how the hell did glenn beck get on tv? - to qote olbermann’s description of chris wallace - “…a monkey posing as a reporter…”
September 14th, 2007 at 4:30 pm#75
September 14th, 2007 at 4:59 pmGreat research. But all of these seem really trivial to me, compared to Bush’s big lie. And the point is that the media went after Gore and didn’t go after Bush, who had just as many exagerations and inconsistancies in his past. How many people died, and how many citizens of the world now hate us because Gore exagerated the cost of his mother-in-law’s medicine or any of the other “lies” your team seems so dedicated to exposing? If the same amount of research was done on Bush you would have pages and pages of things he has said that were lies too. We really only care about one. The illegal war that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives, billions of dollars, and our international reputation.
But it’s not surprising that you care more about Gore exagerating his numbers against Bradley in a primary 7 years ago. I mean, what’s thousands of dead people compared to that?
NO WAIT LOOK AGAIN… HE IS SAYING THAT OLBERMAN’S TEAM ARE ENTITLED TO BE CRITICAL OF FOX NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 14th, 2007 at 7:23 pmBut it’s not surprising that you care more about Gore exagerating his numbers against Bradley in a primary 7 years ago. I mean, what’s thousands of dead people compared to that?
Comment by bg — September 14, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
I didn’t bring up the subject of anyone’s lies. I merely responded to a question about why people believe what they believe. I seem to remember hearing quite a bit about Bush’s questionable comments and activities during both campaigns. As I noted in a previous post, I believe most politicians are less than forthright. As for where we would be had Gore been elected, most of our soldiers would still be alive, agreed. And I don’t think we should still be in Iraq either. I suspect we would be having other problems from lack of a response to 9/11, though. (And, no I don’t mean Iraq was responsible for 9/11.)
September 14th, 2007 at 7:28 pmHowie “Baby” Kurtz,
You are a completely useless American!
How is it you are still on the air? CNN!? That says it all.
CNN SUCKS!!! And Howie you lead the parade!!!
September 14th, 2007 at 7:35 pmupright left, the National Review article you linked is the biggest pack of lies and distortions I think I have ever seen.
It’s filled with outright fabrications. They even use the phony “love canal” “quote” that Gore never used. The members of the class he visited protested to the Washington Post that the writer got it completely wrong - and National Review prints the wrong one! And, Gore had visited 22 separate disaster areas with James Lee Witt. He states that he went to a Texas flood with Witt when, in this one instance, he actually went with Witt’s assistant - and this is one of the “lies” National Review cites to demonstrate Gore’s vile character. It’s a joke and the jokes not only on you, it’s on all of us, because instead of Gore, we got the worst president in U.S. history. Nice going, stupid.
September 14th, 2007 at 7:55 pmKurz is married to Republican consultant and commentator Sheri Annis.
Kurtz falsely implied in a column that Reagan left office a more “popular figure” than Clinton. Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz falsely suggested that former President Ronald Reagan, unlike former President Bill Clinton, “left office a popular figure” — overlooking Clinton’s higher final approval rating; higher average approval rating; higher second-term average rating; and higher average rating than Reagan’s for their final two years in office.
Kurtz wrote in his June 21 “Media Notes” column:
Reagan, despite the Iran-contra scandal, left office a popular figure; Clinton’s departure came two years after he was impeached and was clouded by his wave of last-minute pardons.
Reagan’s final Gallup job approval rating before leaving office was 63 percent. Clinton’s was 65 percent — the “highest for a departing president in the half-century of modern polling.” [USA Today, 1/17/01]
Over the course of his entire presidency, Reagan had an average Gallup approval rating of 53 percent — not bad. But not as good as that of Clinton, whose average approval rating was 55 percent.
Further, Gallup recently noted, “Clinton’s overall second-term average was substantially higher than his first term, at 61%. (Reagan’s second-term average was 55%.)”
This chart of Gallup approval ratings for the last five presidents shows that Clinton was consistently much more popular during his last two years in office than Reagan was during his last two years as president.
Kurtz also quoted “Fox commentator Oliver North,” who “scoffed at ‘the idea of infidelity being something you just dismiss, and that his lying before a grand jury isn’t worthy of impeachment or a resignation.’”
Kurtz didn’t mention the irony of Oliver North (who was convicted of lying to Congress) criticizing Bill Clinton (who was never convicted of anything) for “lying before a grand jury.” (North’s conviction was later overturned.)
September 15th, 2007 at 3:20 amroutinely stalks you mean
September 15th, 2007 at 9:08 pmBill Clinton ‘ I never had sex with that woman, but i did with that one and that one and that one.”
September 15th, 2007 at 9:10 pmDamn! If only we had T.V. in our day. We could have used something like ‘Fix’ ‘Propaganda’ er, sorry, ‘News’. Then i wouldn’t have had to shout myself hoarse, getting all those Germans into a state of mass hysteria at all those Nazi rallies! Fix News- We distort, you comply!
September 16th, 2007 at 7:56 pmUh, watch it again. Kurtz says that although it not HIS viewpoint, Obermann and MSNBC have the right to make those allegations about Fox News.
September 17th, 2007 at 4:15 pmAlthough Faux News is obviously part of the GOP machinery, in this case, I gotta agree with Post #88. Kurtz is referring to Keith Olbermann and MSNBC.
September 17th, 2007 at 4:22 pm81
September 17th, 2007 at 4:29 pmOld thread, but just for the record, you said “I didn’t bring up the subject of anyone’s lies”.
I was responding to an article you linked to entitled “The Gore Lies”.
F O X = 6 15 24 = 6 1+5 2+4 = 6 6 6
September 17th, 2007 at 10:40 pm