Defending Bill O'Reilly

Bill O'Reilly caught flak from Media Matters on a made-up controversy subsequently amplified by CNN.  The NY Times coverage is dreadful from a reality-based point of view, although I suspect the reality-based community will cheer it; the WaPo is much better.

Let's start with the Times lead:

It was not your typical day at Sylvia’s restaurant, the famous soul food institution in Harlem. A CNN crew showed up around lunchtime yesterday, interviewed patrons and filmed some close-ups of a plate of food. Reporters cornered tourists with questions about their dining experience, and the restaurant’s regulars called, not to make an order, but to ask about the controversy.

The food, atmosphere and clientele at Sylvia’s were a matter of nationwide attention yesterday because Bill O’Reilly, the Fox News Channel talk show host, recently described being surprised to find that the black-owned establishment was as pleasant as other restaurants.

“It was like going into an Italian restaurant in an all-white suburb in the sense of people were sitting there, and they were ordering and having fun,” Mr. O’Reilly said on his nationally syndicated radio show on Sept. 19. “And there wasn’t any kind of craziness at all.”

His comments have outraged some black leaders and baffled black New Yorkers, many of whom said yesterday they were puzzled by what sort of craziness Mr. O’Reilly would expect to find at Sylvia’s, since the Lenox Avenue restaurant is a favorite of Harlem residents, international tourists and former President Bill Clinton.

Indeed, yesterday afternoon, as Mr. O’Reilly accurately described, iced teas were ordered with civility, not hostility. Servers behind the counter were shoveling ice into glasses and dishing out macaroni and cheese, greens, chicken and some of the other specialties. Black and white customers described Mr. O’Reilly variously as living under a rock, or ignorant of black Americans, or, in the words of one diner, George Hymen, 68, “nutty in the head.”

Dead tree readers who follow the jump will finally find a bit of an O'Reilly rally in paragraph seven:

Mr. O’Reilly told The Associated Press yesterday that his comments had been taken out of context. “If you listened to the full hour, it was a criticism of racism on the part of white Americans who are ignorant of the fact that there is no difference between white and black anymore,” he said. “Circumstances may be different in their lives, but we’re all Americans. Anyone who would be offended by that conversation would have to be looking to be offended.”

Well, yes.  No reasonable person listening to the whole tedious exchange on O'Reilly's show would have taken offense - his entire theme was that, contrary to the images presented by the hip-hop community, Sylvia's was quite normal.

The WaPo manages to grasp this: 

Bill O'Reilly says he thought he was dispelling stereotypes when he told his radio audience last week about his recent trip to Harlem with the Rev. Al Sharpton. Instead, O'Reilly found himself yesterday fighting accusations of racial insensitivity.

During a 35-minute discussion about race relations last Wednesday on his syndicated "Radio Factor," the pugnacious host repeatedly decried "demeaning" portrayals of African Americans, particularly in hip-hop videos. To illustrate his contention that such images provide a false impression of black culture, he recalled having dinner with Sharpton at Sylvia's, a famous soul-food restaurant in Harlem:

"I couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City," he said. "It was exactly the same, even though it's run by blacks [and has a] primarily black patronship. It was the same. And that's really what this society is really all about now here in the U.S.A. There's no difference."

He later added: "There wasn't one person in Sylvia's who was screaming, '[Expletive], I want some more ice tea.' It was like going into an Italian restaurant in an all-white suburb in the sense of people were sitting there ordering and having fun and there wasn't any craziness at all."

On the same program last week, O'Reilly also described going to an Anita Baker concert at Radio City Music Hall at which "the blacks [patrons] were well dressed." He added, "This is what white America doesn't know. They think the culture is dominated by Twista, Ludacris and Snoop Dogg."

This is not complicated, but O'Reilly's critics hope to make it so. 

Comments

[Jane]

You know I can't stand O'Reilly, but I can't stand the pathetic "free press" wholly owned by George Soros, even more.

[clarice]

Ditto. It's clear that media matters (Brock and Sid Vicious) Blumenthal's son want to shut Bill up and replay the Imus fandango.
What rational people might miss, however, is that the facts are irrelevant. This is pure McCarthyism--make inattentive people associate right wing coomentators as racist, beyond the pale and therefore, not to be listened to at all on anything.They've been doing it to Rush (with no success) for years.

[MayBee]

This was really awful of Bill O'Reilly, because nobody has ever tried to say there is such a thing as a black community or black culture.
Certainly both entertainment and politics are completely colorblind, and even discussing differences in the way races are portrayed or perceived is beyond the pale.
Pretty soon he'll be talking as if there is such a thing as black voters, and maybe even suggest black people should hold their own Presidential debate on a Black Entertainment Network or something. He'll probably make it sound like there are things like "black issues".
Stupid Bill O'Rielly. Trying to divide the races when the rest of our society is working so hard to keep us as one! What a racist he is!

[MayBee]

I mean, pretty soon that racist Bill O'Reilly will try to say that black people are so different, they should have easier admissions standards for college.
I bet Media Matters would really go after him for something that blatant.

[SteveMG]

CNN's Rick Sanchez says that O'Reilly's criticism of the hip hop/gangster culture is a "Mandingo argument" where he (O'Reilly) is disseminating the view that America needs to be protected from "big bad African Americans".

Read that line again.

"Mandingo argument".

Someone needs to tell Mr. Sanchez that a reporter's job is to report new stories and not inject himself into news stories.

Geez, I think news organizations are just grabbing people off the street to do the news. Absolutely no qualifications are needed.

SMG

[sylvia]

"I couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City," he said. "It was exactly the same, even though it's run by blacks"

I'm a fan of Bill's, however Bill committed several big verbal slip ups here in his language that are very telling. When he said "I couldn't get over the fact there was no difference" it means he was expecting a difference. And then he used the verbotten "even though" phrase, as in, "even though it was run by blacks". So he stuck his foot in his mouth there and in a Freudian way revealed subconscious racist thoughts.

However, race equality advocates should not pillory Bill over this. There should be no shame in admitting or somehow revealing your possible racist thoughts, if you reveal them in the quest to gain some understanding of the races. We are often told that denying your ideas and pretending they don't exist is the worst thing to do and instead by admitting your feelings openly and then exploring them with others is the best way to achieve racial understanding. So while Bill may have accidently revealed some racist thinking that truth be told is actually common among many people, his accidental slip up was done in the quest to achieve some racial understanding and reconcilliation and should instead he should be commended for his efforts.

[Gmax]

WHAT???

[Gmax]

WHAT???

[Gmax]

WHAT???

[centralcal]

Rick Sanchez is trying to be the CNN answer to Keith Olbermann on MSNBC - gin up some phony controversy and hope to climb in the ratings against Bill O'Reilly (all in the 8 pm slot).

I think the media is already signaling that it is going to be all out war this Presidential election go-round. NPR refusing to air Juan Williams interview of President Bush. Schmucko Shuster trying to chew up and spit out a Republican congresswoman with false information.

I honestly think it's gonna get much worse than anything we have seen in the past. They (the liberal media) have been unsuccessful in helping to elect a President from their team the past 2 election cycles.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

I think O'Reilly was saying that it was amazing that Sharpton eats with normal people rather than crazies like himself.

Anyway, the point about Rappers and Hip Hop artists has been made by none other than Wynton Marsalis. He talks about how sad the old-timers--guys who played with Ellington, say--were about what had happened with the music scene.

It's a long way from the day when a Billy Strayhorn could take the directions Duke Ellington wrote down for him to get to his Harlem apartment, and turn them into the signature tune of that orchestra. The first line of those directions being, 'Take the A-train'.

[sylvia]

shorter sylvia for Gmax- Bill slipped up, but he was doing it with good intentions, unlike Imus who does it to degrade people for cheap laughs.

[MayBee]

Sylvia- are your "race equality advocates" the people that champion separate black-issue presidential debates and affirmative action?
Is it more racist to note that the predominant "black culture" images in popular culture don't really represent black culture, or to say there is such a thing as black culture?

[SteveMG]

"I couldn't get over the fact there was no difference" it means he was expecting a difference.

This line was the most troubling to me too when I heard it (live). But if you read that line in the fullest context of his larger point - that black Americans are no different than anyone else - it loses some of its "sting".

If, as he stated, black Americans are "like everyone else" (as they obviously are), why would he say that he expected the black-run business to be "different"? Different how?

Well, O'Reilly has explained that what he meant was that he thought that as an black-owned restaurant it would be a black "themed" business. He explained that if you go to an Italian-American owned restaurant that there is an Italian menu and Italian decor in the business.

But the restaurant was not designed for a black clientele in the manner that an Italian-American restaurant would be designed for Italian-Americans. It was like "any other" restaurant that one goes to.

That's not an entirely inconceivable explanation. I have to admit that if I went to a black-owned restaurant (hell, I probably have without knowing it), I would expect it to have a black "environment" of some sort. Either the music being played or the menu or pictures of black historic figures on the wall.

SMG

[Topsecretk9]

He didn't screw up and he was discussing it in the context of his grandmother who he said based her dislike of african americans on the caricature perception she had seen (like on TV etc) versus her actually knowing any african americans. - which is exactly the premise behind Juan William's book, the guest on his show this was discussed.

[SteveMG]

He didn't screw up and he was discussing

Well, I agree since it's unfair to strip this one line (or few lines) out of its entire context.

Usually, when public figures complain that their words were stripped of context, that's an attempt at covering their big butts. In this case, viewing the statements in the fullest context is essential.

But if you just heard someone say: "I went to a black restaurant and it was no different than any other", wouldn't you go, "Huh??".

O'Reilly gave his critics a big fat stick with this one. He's a big boy; he can defend himself.

SMG

[SPQR]

Sure, he can defend himself, Steve. And there is no problem with legitimate criticisms based on what he does or says. But here he has to defend himself from fraudulent criticism - based on fabrications made by selective editing.

[Topsecretk9]

SMG

I know he can defend himself (or ONLY he should, I guess is what you are saying) but I don't agree he has anything to defend. Juan William's even noted that they were having an honest discussion about race and honest discussions aren't tip toey politically correct feel good bs designed to steer clear of fascist aholes at Media Matters.

By Media Matters despicable standard they have labeled Hillary Clinton a disgusting racist for saying all Ghandi's own the gas stations and Joe Biden for believing you can't go into a Dunkin' Dounuts without an Indian accent?

Both big people who want to be President of US.

[MayBee]

If, as he stated, black Americans are "like everyone else" (as they obviously are)

Yes, it's true that black Americans are "like everyone else". It is not true that that is the message given out every day by politicians, media, and the entertainment industry. I see nothing wrong with him discussing the fact that people ARE alike, because the differences are pointed out all the time.
Why did Sharpton take O'Reilly to a soul-food restaurant in Harlem, if not to show him precisely that black culture does not equal hip hop culture?
If that's what O'Reilly brings away from his visit, is it racist for him to note that?

[kim]

Everyone born in the Twentieth Century is a racist.
==================

[Sue]

O'Reilly is used to Media Matters lying about him. He is used to Olbermann lying about him. What had him pissed off was CNN. He usually ignores Media Matters and snarks at Olbermann but he was pissed at CNN. And so was Juan Williams, for what it's worth.

[Topsecretk9]

Well, I for one love it when I hear the person on the most watched cable news show repeat and repeat and repeat that Media Matters is a hack organization financed by Soros. Limbaugh is attacked by the illegitimate shady Soros funded group and I look forward to Limbaugh reminding his views they are funded by Soros.

[Topsecretk9]

his "listeners", I meant

[Topsecretk9]

and more shady funding by Soros...Texas Rainmakers links is great too

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/09/27/hillary-rodham-oros-tied-to-dirty-defunct-dem-group/

[centralcal]

TSK9:

"Media Matters is a hack organization financed by Soros."

Aren't ALL liberal/democrat organizations funded by Soros? It is getting so hard to keep track anymore.

[centralcal]

O/T: I see the debate last night is the 2nd lowest rated (after the August debate moderated by Olbermann) according to Drudge.

Looks like our gal Jane, the liveblogger, wasn't the only one too bored to watch.

[Jane]

Actually I fell asleep. I assume most of the country followed suit.

[Sara]

You can go listen to the whole exchange on BillO'Reilly.com. If you do, you will hear the context, which started with O'Reilly making the point that some white people, like his Grandmother, are afraid of blacks even though they've never met any. That was the lead in to the Sylvia's remark. In other words, he was trying to show how stupid that kind of racism is by saying that you can go to a great restaurant like Sylvia's and everyone looks normal like any other restuarant. No bogeyman there.

The whole thing was about mindless racism.

[Topsecretk9]

O'Reilly is hunting down the Media Matter smear machine

http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/iblog/C168863457/E20070927133754/

[centralcal]

Tops: It isn't just O'Reilly (good link by the way) it is everyone who is not far left liberal. Somewhere above on this thread, during my work day, I posted that I really believe this election cycle is going to be all out war - the MEDIA - more than the candidates.

[Elliott]

Did you watch, centralcal?

The 20 minutes I tuned in for would have been better spent watching Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares.

[centralcal]

Did I watch? Watch what? I listented. Tops linked to an an audio clip of O'Reilly's radio broadcast.

[Jim E.]

"O'Reilly is used to Media Matters lying about him."

How does Media Matters lie about O'Reilly? They provide a transcript and audio/video for what he says, and not just a sentence or two.

"Media Matters is a hack organization financed by Soros."

George Soros doesn't fund Media Matters.

"Why did Sharpton take O'Reilly to a soul-food restaurant in Harlem, if not to show him precisely that black culture does not equal hip hop culture?"

There is no evidence that this was Sharpton's motivation, but if so, it would only reinforce how ignorant O'Reilly is and undercut all claims that O'Reilly was somehow taken out of context. Plus, Sharpton has so far refused -- as far as I am aware -- to endorse what O'Reilly said.

"viewing the statements in the fullest context is essential."

O'Reilly has a history of making idiotic racial comments, so it is unclear why O'Reilly should be given much slack with this most recent one.

[Ann]

Whose Offended ReallY?

Juan Williams is called a "Happy Negro" YES I AM OFFENDED!

Decent Men called liars and partisans (Ted Olson, General Petraus) YES I AM OFFENDED!

Asking my neighbors to pay for my health care. YES I AM OFFENDED!

Admitted American Killers welcomed on our soil . YES I AM OFFENDED!

70% of black children have no father. YES I AM OFFENDED!

Christians are made fun of every day but please don't upset Moslems. YES I AM OFFENDED!

Political Power is more important than the security of America!
YES I AM OFFENDED!

Hillary Clinton has a chance in hell of being the President of these great United States. YES I AM OFFENDED!

The Press is bought and paid for my Soros The Satan, YES I AM OFFENDED!

The DNC, liberals, and MSM offend us everyday...will we demand they apologize to US?

[Topsecretk9]

Ann

Racism is only a tool for the left, otherwise they wouldn't call african americans "house negro's" or use gratuitous images of blackface when it suits them. It's all faery that they "care" -- just like Shuster's use of a dead soldier from Move-On's false ill informed crib sheet.

[Cecil Turner]

George Soros doesn't fund Media Matters.

What a load of hogwash. A quick google turns up "O'Reilly falsely accused Media Matters of lying about Soros funding" in which MMA "debunks" the following claim:

O'Reilly noted that the Tides Foundation donated over $1 million to Media Matters in 2005, "[a]nd just by coincidence Soros' Open Society Institute [OSI] donated more than a million dollars to Tides in 2005."

Oho, so here we go, MMA is going to show that he's lying, eh? Not so fast. Here's the defense:

But O'Reilly's conclusion that Soros donated $1 million to Media Matters through the Tides Foundation is false. OSI's donations to Tides were earmarked for several specific programs, and Media Matters was not included on this list.

Is that it? That's MMA's defense? You're kidding me, right? So if I give a million to Joe, and he gives Fred a million out of his other pocket, I've got nothing to do with the million going to Fred, eh? would you accept this sort of explanation from a Republican?

And let's contrast that statement with this one from a couple years earlier:

To date, neither Media Matters nor its president and CEO David Brock has received any money from Soros or from any organization with which he is affiliated.

A claim from which he apparently backpedaled. In any event, this is about as convincing as Media Matters' and CREW's claims to be non-partisan. G'wan, pull the other one.

[centralcal]

This is O/T: I see that Mel Amnesty Martinez is leaving his post as Chairman of the RNC after the primaries. Not a minute too soon, if you ask me.

I love Novak claiming that it is because Mel was being drowned out by the Republican candidates (I paraphrased). What a hoot that statement is! It couldn't possibly be that donations were drying up due to Mel's statements about illegal immigrants, etc.?

[centralcal]

Oh, and Tops, the plot thickens about Shuster maybe reneging on his apology. According to FishbowlDC, it seems that the soldier lived a brief while with his girlfriend and her mother before going into the service. It seems the mother's home was in Blackburn's district. However, the letter to Congress people notifying of the death, was not sent to Blackburn, but rather to the Congressman in the soldiers' home district.

It's all really beside the point. Shuster was still a schmuck, as he always is.

[MayBee]

There is no evidence that this was Sharpton's motivation, but if so, it would only reinforce how ignorant O'Reilly is and undercut all claims that O'Reilly was somehow taken out of context. Plus, Sharpton has so far refused -- as far as I am aware -- to endorse what O'Reilly said.

Sara said (I haven't listened) that O'Reilly was discussing this in context to people like his grandmother. Grandma, then, would be the ignorant one. But ignorant doesn't equal racist, even if it is Bill himself that was ignorant.

Sharpton makes his living driving a wedge in any perceived crack between races that he can find. For him to criticize O'Reilly for noting that there is *little* difference between the races would indeed be rich.

My point is that our society is daily dissected into different communities, polling groups, and special interest groups along the lines of our perceived differences. It isn't taboo to have things like black issues Presidential debates on Black Entertainment Television, or have Sally Field say women wouldn't make war if they ran the world. Well...is it racist(sexist) to say there are differences? Is it racist(sexist) to say there are not?

[SteveMG]

O'Reilly has a history of making idiotic racial comments, so it is unclear why O'Reilly should be given much slack with this most recent one..

And that "history" includes? If there was a "history", why not include one or two pieces of that past?

Next, we'll be hearing that O'Reilly called Mexicans "wetbacks". Which is what the smear thugs at Media Matters accused him of doing.

Falsely.

SMG

[Jane]

So is anyone else getting a spam message in the topic that has been spammed: "Defending Hillary, Promoting Edwards, Thumping Hillary"

[boris]

Yup

[MayBee]

You mean "Joe"? Or are you seeing something else?

[Jane]

Yeah I mean Joe. I tried to post there and got a message that it was spam (and I wasn't even in a tirade).

[kim]

Probably Jason.
===============

[HoosierHoops]

Everyone born in the Twentieth Century is a racist.
==================

Posted by: kim |

I hope that was tongue in cheek..

[kim]

Gotcha, paraphrasing a famous Secretary of Agriculture. Just as true today.
=================================

[clarice]

Yes, Cecil, money is fungible. Tides is nothing but a moeny laundering organization and outhg to be stopped by the IRS. There is no reason for tax exempt organizations to make contributions thru another tax exempt organization except to hide the donors. Tides has given to every seedy lefty group, including the eco terrorists ELF--Teresa contributed mightily to it before and during her husband's run to do this. Moreover, Tides takes a hefty slice off the top to distribute as it pleases.

Activistcash.com contains a great deal on Tides and its doings.

[sylvia]

"Well, O'Reilly has explained that what he meant was that he thought that as an black-owned restaurant it would be a black "themed" business. He explained that if you go to an Italian-American owned restaurant that there is an Italian menu and Italian decor in the business. "

Okay, that sounds reasonable. I confess I did not listen to the whole radio show, but if THAT's what he said before or after, it makes sense. If that's what he said, O'Reilly should have provided that context to defend himself. Instead all I saw him say to defend himself the last couple days was his statement to 'listen to the radio show' which kind of sounds like he's hiding. After all, most people don't have the time and interest to listen to a 1 hour show online just to see if Bill is fudging, and you would think he'd realize that. He should have provided excerpts of that context on the screen for us - you know make it easy for us. Anyway, maybe I will listen to the radio show sometime this weekend if I have the time and energy for it to see for myself.

[Sara]

He should have provided excerpts of that context on the screen for us

He did on the very first night of the controversy.

[centralcal]

I see McCain has issued a "statement" about Rush Limbaugh and the "phony soldiers" nonsense. It was posted at The Plank, natch! Just another reason why I don't like John. Rush posted the context of what he said - both at his website and on YouTube - today. McCain or a staff member could have gotten the facts before issuing a statement. Jeesh.

This seems to be the season for "racist" charges - some real, some imagined. I see that Edwards thinks we are on the verge of not having "a young African-American male population in America." He fears they are all going to be in prison - or dead, one of the two.

[Topsecretk9]

He should have provided excerpts of that context on the screen for us

And crayons and diagrams for those who are stupid enough to listen to Media Matters.

-------

Murtha will have to testify in defamation case

“You’re writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?” Collyer said, adding later, “How far can a congressman go and still be protected?”

Collyer said she was troubled by the idea the lawmakers are immune from lawsuits regardless of what they say to advance their political careers.

[centralcal]

Hooray for Judge Collyer!

[clarice]

It's time someone sued Media Matters, I think.

[Topsecretk9]

Me too Clarice.

---

I see that Edwards thinks we are on the verge of not having "a young African-American male population in America." He fears they are all going to be in prison - or dead, one of the two.

Hmmm. I could be honest here, but I'll just play Media Matter's game ...can't wait to tell my neighbor Doug, Jon Edward's says he and his son will be in prison or dead soon.

[centralcal]

Okay, anyone here a political high finance expert? The Dems have raised enormous amounts of cash, and we're only in the primaries. The Repubs, not so much.

I wonder if all the big money donors on the Dem side haven't rushed out of the gate awfully early (not to mention the "funny money" - ah ah ah Shu! Excuse me.) Are the Repubs just being shrewder, hedging their bets until they see who on our side wins the primary and the real horse race begins?

Am I naive? Uh, probably. I am not enthused right now, as an extremely modest donor, but know I will be more forthcoming later on. Well . . . with qualifications . . . John McCain won't do it for me! Any thoughts, you guys?

[Topsecretk9]

Ace has a pretty important post up and FISA heads should read and weigh in...

Last May, Iraqi terrorists kidnapped three American soldiers.

American intelligence officials searched for cyber-signals about the kidnapping... and actually found them. They found the kidnappers talking to each other on-line.

However, they had to stop listening because the signals were passing through an American-based server and under the law that meant there could be no eavesdropping without a warrant.

So they stopped listening in on foreign terrorists holding kidnapped American soldiers.

For ten hours, officials worked to get "emergency authorization" to resume eavesdropping.

This then required the personal okay of AG Gonzales, who couldn't be reached for two hours.

So a 12 hour gap after the kidnappers had been discovered.

The law has been changed to expressly permit eavesdropping in this situation, and some Democrats such as Rep. Reyes (D) are arguing for a rollback to the previous rule.

One of those kidnapped soldiers, I'm told, was later found dead and mutilated. Whether the gap in eavesdropping may have averted this I don't know, and perhaps no one will ever know.

[Rick Ballard]

Centralcal,

I distrust polls more than most people but I have to give some credence to the ones that show approval ratings for all pols down in the pimp and prostitute range. The old adage that "no one has ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people" may be disproven this year.

Alternatively, people may be sitting on their wallets, waiting to see if The Beast actually wins the nomination - if she does then all those believing in Truth, Justice and the American Way may start writing checks as if there were no tomorrow.

Justifiably.

The Clinton/McAuliffe 24/7/365 campaign strategy doesn't appear to be functional at the moment. Seein' 'em more /= lovin' 'em more.

[centralcal]

You know, Rick, I really believe that you are right about "sitting on their wallets." Yeah - we have had it with our elected officials and enthusiasm has waned for the pols. BUT . . . "The Beast" and her socialist agenda scare me much more than my cynicism about "our" side. I would give . . . probably more than I could afford to . . . to see that that didn't happen. I only hope there are more out there feeling the same way!

[clarice]

I'm waiting--and the RNC can wait a long time--they pumped money to Chafee when others needed it and deserved it more.

[SteveMG]

It's time someone sued Media Matters, I think

One has to tip his hat to them. They've done some excellent work in getting their material into the mainstream press. That's the key component of their actions. It's not enough to disseminate their material to a lefty internet audience. It has to go to the public at-large.

And a number of MSM outlets are uncritically (apparently) repeating their charges.

I think this will only get worse - from both sides - and will eventually lead to a call to revisit the private vs. public individual standard of Sullivan.

Or at least the public individual standard, malice/reckless disregard.

A couple of successful lawsuits will calm folks down.

Floyd Abrams et al. won't like it; but too bad.

SMG

[centralcal]

Oh, Clarice, I couldn't agree with you more. And, you know what - I got a fundraising call from the RNC about 2 months ago. I let the poor girl have it about the RNC and about Mel Martinez chairing it! So I was thrilled today to learn that he is resigning (alas, after the primaries). I am pretty sure they got an earful from many on their call list. If not, they surely figured something out when the envelopes weren't returned with checks or credit card info! Now, if they will only DO something about it. Waiting. Waiting.

[centralcal]

"And a number of MSM outlets are uncritically (apparently) repeating their charges."

Oh, SMG! For heaven's sake! The MSM outlets are desperate to WIN this time. Their candidiate is ANY candidate with a "D" after their name. You can't honestly believe they have ethics and standards and impartiality - can you?

I remember watching Judy Woodruff burst out in sobs on CNN after the election results came in and John F. Kerry was not gonna be the President of the United States. At least she showed her honest and heartfelt emotions and dropped all illusions of pretense!

[boris]

I think there is a bigger point about the Media Matters smears on Rush and O'Reilly.

Are Rush and O'Reilly to blame for the MSM pickup on the smears because they should have done a better job of advancing the truth or avoiding controversial topics?

Hope that sounds silly. Obviously Rush and O'Reilly are among the best communicators in the business. So shouldn't it be admitted that "the problem" goes beyond doing a better job of avoidance or adhering to saintliness?

[SteveMG]

You can't honestly believe they have ethics and standards and impartiality - can you?

Sorry, I don't believe that every reporter for every MSM organization is an ethical eunuch.

There are lots of very talented and honest people in the press.

Not as many as is needed; but lots.

The main problem, it seems to me, is just sloppiness and a desire to hype stories. When those concerns override accuracy, a "bad" news product is created.

SMG

[clarice]

Even under the Sullivan test, Media Matters is courting litigation. It cannot be denied that they are operating out of malice or deliberate disregard for the truth. And in the process we'd learn a great deal about their funding.

[Topsecretk9]

sorry, OT --

Privacy rules forced intelligence agencies to wait about 12 hours to tap an Iraqi phone number believed to be connected to the kidnappers of three U.S. soldiers in Iraq this spring, intelligence officials have told members of Congress. By the time officials obtained the legal permission for the tap, it was no longer useful, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell told the House Intelligence Committee. The officials had to show that the target likely was a foreign agent and get the attorney general's approval, which is why it took so long, he said.

The kidnapping case puts human faces on the debate over the future of the foreign surveillance law, a discussion that had previously been highly technical. Some committee Democrats, however, suggested the incident had been exaggerated. They asked why agents did not proceed with a wiretap and then seek authority later, a power that has been part of the surveillance law for years.

Two of the soldiers, from the 10th Mountain Division in Fort Drum, N.Y., remain missing, according to Pentagon reports. A third was found killed in Iraq on May 23, 11 days after the men were captured in a raid south of Baghdad that the Army believes was carried out by al-Qaeda.

Since May, intelligence officials have cited the incident in classified discussions as evidence that surveillance laws that provide too much protection to foreign targets need to be changed.

Some committee Democrats, however, suggested the incident had been exaggerated. They asked why agents did not proceed with a wiretap and then seek authority later, a power that has been part of the surveillance law for years.

Can you believe this? Democrats say the delay and a death of a US Soldier and 2 more missing is exaggerated on the one hand but the Democrats NOW say they should proceeded WITHOUT a WARRANT and sought authority later!!!!

Bastards and lying pieces of crap...sorry, but this is BAD.

oh and they also had the gull to say McConnell was trying to politicize it...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-09-23-mcconnell_N.htm

[centralcal]

SMG: I heartily disagree with:

"There are lots of very talented and honest people in the press.
Not as many as is needed; but lots."

I don't disagree with the "talented." However, I would only agree with "some" honest people in the press.

I think there are many (a majority?)ordinary, everyday people who feel as I do and it is reflected in the polls that are taken from time to time on the public's trust of the media.

[centralcal]

Tops: Hot Air has a video of a Fox News report on this also.

[boris]

Some committee Democrats, however, suggested the incident had been exaggerated. They asked why agents did not proceed with a wiretap and then seek authority later, a power that has been part of the surveillance law for years.

Arg missy Turner, the pirate's code dimorat law is more in the nature of guidelines than actual rules you see.

Actually the retro warrant feature of FISA is more of an escape clause than usable mechanism. It allows just this sort of "don't blame us" excuse. In fact the constraints on the use require high confidence that a warrant would be issued and high level case by case permission.

The requirement for a warrent, retro or otherwise, in this kind of situation is an outrage.

[Jane]

Even under the Sullivan test, Media Matters is courting litigation.

I agree. The next hurdle are the Judge Waltons and the Eliott Spitzers (funny how his unethical conduct got swept under the rug) and the Fitzy's of the world. I encounter more unethical practices among lawyers than I've ever seen before - and every case can't make it up to the SJC level.

[Jane]

The next hurdle IS

Sheesh!

[hit and run]

Jane, honestly, I missed your live blogging of the Dem debate. I respect your choice not to live blog and can certainly appreciate the decision not to live blog. Screw the debate. The debate means jack shinola. I missed your live blogging.

I mean, If you live blogged your daily commute. I would be on pins and needles waiting for it. Even if you home office.

[Jane]

H&R,

I regret it and will not let it happen again. It was a lapse of judgment on my part and I apologize.

[Elliott]

Did you watch, centralcal?

The 20 minutes I tuned in for would have been better spent watching Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares.

Posted by: Elliott | September 27, 2007 at 10:13 PM

Sorry to be unclear. I meant the Democratic debate, not anything O'Reilly related.

I'm just glad I didn't have any internet access where I was watching. Any attempt at liveblogging that debate on my part would not have ended well.

[wow power leveling]

wow gold
wow gold
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
wow power level
wow power level
wow power level
cheap wow power leveling
cheap wow power leveling
cheap wow powerleveling
cheap wow powerleveling
codeheart article
Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
cheap wow gold

[asdas]

cheapest, best service have it on wow gold

. so many wonderful things you can enjon it not only cheapest price, best

distrubition,all from wow leveling ,

warcraft gold promptly,best service only

get it from wow power leveling

[bethcrogers]

Dear Bill. You are awesome. Your interview with Hillary was so perfect. You have an incredible gift as a reporter. I support you ,all you say and do. You are my voice on T.V. God Bless You. Sincerely, Beth Rogers

[dfg]

The information contained herein is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee(s). Lincoln, its director, employees and agents, makes no representation and gives no warranty as to the accuracy of this communication and does not accept any responsibility for any errors or inaccuracies in or omissions from this communication (whether negligent or otherwise) and shall not be liable for any loss or damage howsoever arising as a result of any person acting or refraining from acting in reliance on any information contained herein. No reader should rely on this communication as it does not purport to be comprehensive or to render advice. This disclaimer does not purport to exclude any warranties implied by law which may not be lawfully excluded. We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this e-mail. We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses.
roulette system
video poker
online blackjack

[battery]

lawfully excluded. We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this e-mail. We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses.

[sophy]

Please do not hesitate to have Metin2 gold . It is funny.