Vieira: HRC's Book 'Imperative,' Should Admit War Vote 'Mistake' --12/19/2006


1. Vieira: HRC's Book 'Imperative,' Should Admit War Vote 'Mistake'
Interviewing Senator Hillary Clinton on Monday's Today, Meredith Vieira gushed over the relevance of her ten-year old It Takes a Village book and pressed her about running for President and why she won't admit her vote for the war was "a mistake?" Vieira began: "I want to start with It Takes a Village '07. Because this book came out ten years ago and a lot has happened in the past ten years that makes it I think even more imperative. That we will need a village to raise healthy secure children. We've had the war in Iraq, 9-11, the impact of the Internet. What is the most important thing we can do, as a nation, to guarantee that our children are safe and secure?" Vieira soon pushed the Senator: "Why wouldn't you run for President? I mean, the polls indicate that if you did run, you're the front runner." Vieira reminded Clinton how "other Senators who voted that way," for the war, "like Senators Kerry and Edwards have said, 'we feel, we regret it. It was a mistake.' You refuse to say it was a mistake. Why?"

2. MSNBC Gives Hour to Olbermann's 'Special Comment' Attacks on Bush
On Monday's Countdown, viewers were treated to a special retrospective of MSNBC host Keith Olbermann's series of "Special Comment" attacks on the Bush administration, featuring four of Olbermann's favorites. An the announcer teased the show glorifying Olbermann while intermixing complimentary quotes from various media with clips of Olbermann reading his "Special Comments," such as: "The President has been given the greatest pass for incompetence and malfeasance in American history." The announcer read quotes calling Olbermann "hot," "charismatic," "witty," and "a cross between Edward R. Murrow and Jon Stewart." The announcer further labeled the featured rants as "Keith's most passionate, most honest, most compelling 'Special Comments.'" AUDIO&VIDEO

3. CNN Highlights AP's Bias: Arrested Illegals Called 'Victims'
Filling in for Lou Dobbs on Friday night, CNN's Kitty Pilgrim highlighted a case of bias at the "supposedly objective" Associated Press, which led a dispatch about the federal roundup Tuesday of workers at meatpacking plants, by referring to how "hordes of police" had "stormed" the plants, but "the illegal workers arrested may not have been the only victims." Pilgrim marveled: "That's right, the Associated Press calling illegal aliens -- including some charged with stealing the identities of hundreds of Americans -- it called them 'victims.'"

4. NBC Argues 'Clinton Years' Economy Better than Current Economy
On Saturday's NBC Nightly News, while filing a story on the "mind-boggling" bonuses going to those who are "striking it rich" on Wall Street, correspondent Mike Taibbi downplayed the strength of the current economy in comparison to the "Clinton years," and also pointed out the "struggle" of "working Americans." While Taibbi argued that his reference to the "Clinton years" was a "chronological, not political distinction," he praised that period for "lifting more boats" while finding fault in the present. Taibbi: "But to many, today's version of the haves and have-nots feels different. In the boom of the Clinton years -- and I'm talking a chronological, not a political distinction -- the rising tide of that bull market truly did lift all boats, or at least a whole lot more of them."

5. WPost Mildly Calls Bush-Hating Ballet a Work of 'Zealous Gadfly'
In the era of Bill Clinton, the liberal media was not shy about locating "Clinton haters." In March of 1994, Washington Post reporter Ann Devroy reported from the front of conservatism, "Bill Clinton's enemies are making their hatred clear, with a burning intensity and in some case with an organized passion." She listed as haters Rush Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, and so on. But the Post doesn't seem to use the term "Bush hater," even when Bush haters are dancing right in front of them. See Monday's Style section for a feature on a Bush-hating ballet. Susan Kaufman's review of a Kennedy Center performance by the Paul Taylor Dance Company is mildly headlined "Paul Taylor, Hitting Close To Home: At His 'Banquet of Vultures,' George Bush Is the Centerpiece." What a treat, another "antiwar" artist trashing the warmongers, with Bush cast as uncaring about troop deaths, and even committing one himself.


Vieira: HRC's Book 'Imperative,' Should
Admit War Vote 'Mistake'

Interviewing Senator Hillary Clinton on Monday's Today, Meredith Vieira gushed over the relevance of her ten-year old It Takes a Village book and pressed her about running for President and why she won't admit her vote for the war was "a mistake?" Vieira began: "I want to start with It Takes a Village '07. Because this book came out ten years ago and a lot has happened in the past ten years that makes it I think even more imperative. That we will need a village to raise healthy secure children. We've had the war in Iraq, 9-11, the impact of the Internet. What is the most important thing we can do, as a nation, to guarantee that our children are safe and secure?" Vieira soon pushed the Senator: "Why wouldn't you run for President? I mean, the polls indicate that if you did run, you're the front runner." Vieira reminded Clinton how "other Senators who voted that way," for the war, "like Senators Kerry and Edwards have said, 'we feel, we regret it. It was a mistake.' You refuse to say it was a mistake. Why?"

The MRC's Justin McCarthy corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the session in the 7am half hour of the December 18 Today:

Meredith Vieira: "Senator Clinton's best selling book, It Takes a Village, has just been re-released. Senator, good morning to you."
Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY): "Good morning Meredith."
Vieira: "I want to get to 'Hilary '08,' but first I want to start with It Takes a Village '07. Because this book came out ten years ago and a lot has happened in the past ten years that makes it I think even more imperative. That we will need a village to raise healthy secure children. We've had the war in Iraq, 9-11, the impact of the Internet. What is the most important thing we can do, as a nation, to guarantee that our children are safe and secure?"
Clinton: "Well, that's the question that I address in the forward to the book. When I wrote it ten years ago, we had a lot of issues that we needed to deal with. We made progress on those, but we're going backwards now. Child poverty is up, more children are lacking health insurance. There is a sense of being overwhelmed. You know, as a, as a mom myself, I just can't imagine what it's like for young mothers trying to compete with the internet and the mass media. It's like having, you know, another parent in the home."
Vieira: "But if we are going backwards, how do we stop that?"
Clinton: "Well, by, number one, realizing what's going on. Let's face reality. We've got to help parents do the hardest job in the world which is to raise their children. And we need better policies to support parenting and families. And I'd like to see us put children back in the center of our national dialogue. You know, I've been in the Senate now for six years. And one question I asked myself as I try to figure out what is the right thing to do with these myriad of issues that I'm facing? Is, is it good for our kids? And, you know, I try to be guided by that because at the end of the day there isn't anything more important than how we treat our children. And the idea of the village, it's a metaphor for society. You know, I was lucky when Chelsea was, you know, was being raised by her father and me to have a lot of help. Not just by people we knew, family members and teachers and doctors and others, but people we never would know like police and firefighters, and folks who had a direct impact on her upbringing."
Vieira: "Speaking about the village, do you want to run the village? [Clinton laughs] It's sort of, it's the elephant in this room or maybe the donkey in this room since we're talking about a Democratic nomination. But everybody is talking about you and Senator Obama. Really, you've made the cover of 'Newsweek.' Most people have decided you are going to run. The Senator from Illinois said he's thinking about it. You've said you're thinking about it. This to me seems like a perfect opportunity for you Senator to tell us whether you've made a decision."
Clinton: "Well, I'm working hard to make a decision and I will have after the first of the year. I mean, it is really both very flattering and overwhelming to be looking at this. Maybe more than anybody else, I know how hard this job is. I saw it in an up close and personal way for eight years. And I worry that whoever the next President is, is going to face just a myriad of very difficult challenges. So I'm trying to approach this with a big dose of humility number one because it is going to be a hard job no matter who gets it. And number two-"
Vieira: "Well what's the first question you ask yourself? You say you're going to wait until the beginning of the, the new year."
Clinton: "Right, right."
Vieira: "But that's only a couple of weeks away. What's going to happen between now and then to make a decision?"
Clinton: "Well, this is an intensely personal decision. You know, I'm very honored that people are urging me to run and saying they want to sign up. Yet at the end of the day, I want to be sure that my decision is right for me, for my family, for my party, for my country."
Vieira: "Are you leaning in one way or another?"
Clinton: "Well, you know, obviously I'm looking at it. I wouldn't be looking at it if I were totally uninterested."
Vieira: "So you are leaning toward running?"
Clinton: "No, but I'm, I'm looking at very hard. You're good Meredith."
[both laugh]
Vieira: "Well, you gotta lean, you're definitely leaning to the left whichever way you're leaning."
Clinton: "Right. Try to be right here in the center."
Vieira: "How much of, of a say do your daughter and your husband have in all of this? How much do you take their feelings into consideration, their viewpoint?"
Clinton: "Well, I think anybody takes their family into consideration. This is such a grueling endeavor that, if you undertake it, if you don't have your family on your side and really urging you on, you can't do this. It's too much."
Vieira: "Why wouldn't you run for President? I mean, the polls indicate that if you did run, you're the front runner."
Clinton: "Right. Well, you know, I'm trying to weigh all of the different factors. And, you know, one thing that I think is important is whoever the next president is has to hit the ground running. I mean, with all due respect to our current president, he has dug us into some very deep holes as a nation. You know, we've lost respect and admiration abroad, we have a huge deficit, we're having more and more people who are uninsured, we've got global climate change and energy dependence on dangerous parts of the world. We really need to face up with kind of honest optimism. You know, I've always believed Americans can do whatever we set our minds to. We just haven't been asked to do anything in the last six years."
Vieira: "But a lot of people, Senator, think you also represent the past and that's one of the reasons why Barack Obama is so popular with people. They say he represents the future. He says, 'you know, unlike a lot of people,' like you and me, 'I'm not a baby boomer.' Obama says, 'I'm younger, I want change,' and that electrifies people."
Clinton: "Well, he's terrific. You know, he's a friend and a colleague, and I have a very high regard for him. Elections are always about the future. But that's up to the voters. People have to look at candidates. They have to weigh positions on issues. It really comes down to a gut feeling when you're looking at someone, especially someone who could be president and commander and chief and that's what elections are about and campaigns are about."
Vieira: "Do you think he would make a good President with his experience?"
Clinton: "Well, I think-"
Vieira: "Or lack thereof?"
Clinton: "I think he is a, you know, really exciting personality and someone who has a lot to contribute to the national dialogue. We're blessed this year with the people who are thinking of running. You know, we lost one excellent candidate when Senator Evan Bayh said he wasn't going to run. And you know, I would love to see a wide open race. Let as many people run on both sides. Because this country needs the kind of debate that frankly we haven't had in a long time."
Vieira: "Speaking about debate, let's talk a little bit about Iraq. Senator Harry Reid said over the weekend, incoming Democratic Majority Leader, that he would support a temporary increase in troops in the Baghdad area, a temporary surge. The former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, says he's opposed to that. Where do you stand on that position? Do you believe we should send more troops into Iraq?"
Clinton: "It depends, number one, what is the mission of those troops? I am not in favor of sending more troops to continue doing what our young men and women have been told to do with the government of Iraq pulling the rug out from under them when they go after some of the bad guys. I am not in favor of doing that unless it's part of a larger plan. Everyone knows there is no military solution to the difficulties we face in Iraq. There has to be a broad based comprehensive approach that includes resolving some of the political issues, bringing the region together. I have an op-ed in the 'Wall Street Journal' today, urging that they look at an oil trust, like what we did in Alaska when we found oil. Let every Iraqi share in the proceeds so that maybe they will feel a commitment to the future."
Vieira: "But under some circumstances you would potentially support more troops in Iraq."
Clinton: "Well, let's, let's see the plan. You know, I'm not going to believe this President again. I did that once. And lot of us did and it hasn't turned out very well so-"
Vieira: "And, and you've been criticized for that Senator, and you know this is not something that you haven't been subjected to before, by voting to give the President the authority to use force in Iraq if necessary. Some people feel that was a mistake, that you made a mistake. Other Senators who voted that way, like Senators Kerry and Edwards have said, 'we feel, we regret it. It was a mistake.' You refuse to say it was a mistake. Why?"
Clinton: "Well, you know, obviously it was wrong to believe this president. That's tragic to say because people's lives are at stake. And he should have let the inspectors do their job that was what-"
Vieira: "But you were willing to take that vote, to make that vote."
Clinton: "Well, you know, you have to go and look at the situation as we knew it then and I take responsibility for that vote. Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."
Vieira: "Senator Clinton, we have run out of time. When you plan to announce, hopefully she'll do it here."

MSNBC Gives Hour to Olbermann's 'Special
Comment' Attacks on Bush

On Monday's Countdown, viewers were treated to a special retrospective of MSNBC host Keith Olbermann's series of "Special Comment" attacks on the Bush administration, featuring four of Olbermann's favorites. An the announcer teased the show glorifying Olbermann while intermixing complimentary quotes from various media with clips of Olbermann reading his "Special Comments," such as: "The President has been given the greatest


| |
More See & Hear the Bias

pass for incompetence and malfeasance in American history." The announcer read quotes calling Olbermann "hot," "charismatic," "witty," and "a cross between Edward R. Murrow and Jon Stewart." The announcer further labeled the featured rants as "Keith's most passionate, most honest, most compelling 'Special Comments.'"

[This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Monday night, with video, on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org. The audio/video will be added to the posted version of this CyberAlert. But in the meantime, to watch the Real or Windows Media video, or to listen to the MP3 audio of MSNBC's promo at the top of Monday's Countdown, go to: newsbusters.org ]

The taped highlights program is sure to be run several more times by MSNBC over the holidays.

As Olbermann introduced the show, he described his "Special Comments" as "what needed to be said on behalf of men who felt their voice ignored or stilled," and contended that "nobody else with a platform like mine was going to say any of this." Then came a replay of the MSNBC host's "Special Comment" delivered on September 11, 2006, during which Olbermann had accused President Bush of committing the "impeachable" offense of "lying," and accused Bush of committing a "crime against every [September 11th] victim" for not building a September 11th memorial sooner.

For video and a transcript, check the September 12 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org

After a commercial break, Olbermann then introduced his original "Special Comment" which had attacked Defense Secretary Rumsfeld for making comparisons between the current situation in the War on Terrorism and the 1930s debate over how to handle Fascists and Nazis. Introducing the replay, Olbermann contended that Rumsfeld was comparing administration critics in general to "Nazi appeasers," called it the "opening salvo" of a "vicious pre-election propaganda campaign to insult, even bully, American voters," and tagged Rumsfeld's comments as "possibly the most outrageous, most inflammatory, and most inaccurate political statements any member of the Bush administration has ever made."

For that one, see the August 31 CyberAlert, with video: www.mrc.org

Olbermann went on to introduce two more of his "Special Comments." In the October 5 installment, Olbermann had come to the defense of Democrats by accusing President Bush of being a "compulsive liar." He had also accused Bush of "savaging the very freedoms he claims to be protecting from attack."

For a transcript and video, go to the October 6 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org

Then came the fourth "Special Comment," originally aired on November 6, the day before Election Day, during which the MSNBC host had urged voters to vote against the Bush administration. Video and text in the November 7 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org

Below is a complete transcript of the introduction of the Monday December 18 Countdown show (matching the video clip), followed by Olbermann's introductions to the first two "Special Comments" that were replayed:

Announcer: "2006: The year one journalist took a stand."
Announcer, quoting Los Angeles Times: "'Keith Olbermann's gloves come off."
Keith Olbermann: "How dare you ever spin 9/11?"
Announcer: "The year one news man made his voice heard."
Announcer, quoting San Francisco Chronicle: "'He has found a point of view and isn't afraid to use it.'"
Olbermann: "The leading terrorist group in this country right now is the Republican Party."
Announcer: "The year America took notice."
Announcer, quoting San Francisco Chronicle: "'Olbermann is hot."
Announcer, quoting Hollywood Reporter.com: "'charismatic.'"
Announcer, quoting Philadelphia Inquirer: "'always witty.'"
Announcer, quoting The Nation: "'a cross between Edward R. Murrow and Jon Stewart.'"
Announcer, quoting Los Angeles Times: "'Keith talks, people listen.'"
Olbermann: "This is 2006. Standards are lower everywhere."
Announcer: "2006, the year of the 'Special Comment.'"
Olbermann: "The President has been given the greatest pass for incompetence and malfeasance in American history."
Announcer: "Tonight, Keith's most passionate, most honest, most compelling 'Special Comments.'"
Olbermann, dated August 30, 2006: "The man who sees absolutes where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning is either a prophet or a quack. Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet."
Olbermann, dated September 11, 2006: "The only positive on 9/11 was the unanimous humanity. Terrorists did not come and steal our newly regained sense of being American first and political fiftieth. The President and those around him did that."
Olbermann, dated October 5, 2006: "The President of the United States -- unbowed, undeterred, and unconnected to reality -- has continued his extraordinary trek through our country rooting out the enemies of freedom: the Democrats."
Olbermann, dated November 6, 2006: "Having frightened us, having bullied us, having lied to us, having ignored and rewritten the Constitution under our noses, having stayed the course, having denied you have stayed the course, having belittled us about timelines but instead extolled benchmarks, you've now resorted, sir, to this: We must stay in Iraq to save the $2 gallon of gas? Mr. President, there is no other conclusion we can draw as we go to the polls tomorrow. Sir, you have been making this up as you went along."
Announcer: "Countdown with Keith Olbermann: The Year of the 'Special Comment.' Now, from the MSNBC studios, Keith Olbermann."

Olbermann then opened his pre-taped show: "Good evening. Anyone who has quoted it thinks he knows its meanings. 'But be not afraid of greatness,' Shakespeare wrote. 'Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.' Awe-inspiring words unless you know that they come not from one of the bard's tragedies nor his histories, but rather, his comedy Twelfth Night, and that they are read from a letter by the headstrong Malvolio in a scene that features that aptly named Sir Toby Belch. Awe-inspiring words unless you lived through something that makes others apply those words to you, and you realize that they're actually the 17th century version of 'I'm not a doctor, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.' Whatever praise has been given to the 'Special Comments' we've presented in this news hour over the last four months, whatever kindnesses have been extended to me personally in their wake, make no mistake about it: We are all truly grateful. But this was an unintended path you and I traveled in 2006, the simple result of the confluence of events, the realization of what needed to be said on behalf of men who felt their voices ignored or stilled. And most importantly, a very matter-of-fact surprising realization that nobody else with a platform like mine was going to say any of this. And so tonight we bring you again four of the 12 'Special Comments,' beginning with the one the night of September 11th from Ground Zero, with the caveat that this was no campaign nor series, just what one American felt that many other Americans needed to hear."

[replay of Special Comment from September 11, 2006]

Announcer: "Up next, the story that started it all this fall. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's shocking words to war veterans, the character-smearing of anyone who offers up dissent over the war, the first 'Special Comment' of the election season, when this special presentation of Countdown returns."

[commercial break]

Olbermann: "Until the exact moment we learned he would no longer be Secretary of Defense, it had seemed Donald Rumsfeld would be with us for the duration of the Bush administration. In the weeks before the election, the President insisted both Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney would remain at their posts until January 2009. In accepting Rumsfeld's resignation the day after the Republicans lost the House and Senate, the President matter-of-factly explained he had not told the truth about Rumsfeld's job security. And all that makes the remarks he gave this past August to several thousand veterans at the American Legion National Convention all the more galling. Mr. Rumsfeld branding any critics of the administration as morally and intellectually confused."
Donald Rumsfeld, clip #1: "It was a time when a certain amount of cynicism and moral confusion set in among Western democracies. When those who warned about a coming crisis -- the rise of fascism and naziism -- they were ridiculed or ignored."
Rumsfeld clp #2: "I recount that history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism."
Olbermann: "In Mr. Rumsfeld's analogy, terrorists are Nazis, Mr. Bush is Churchill or maybe FDR, and any critics of the war in Iraq or of the administration in general are Nazi appeasers. The opening salvo in what proved to be a vicious preelection propaganda campaign to insult, even bully, American voters. Rumsfeld's remarks were quite possibly the most outrageous, most inflammatory, and most inaccurate political statements any member of the Bush administration has ever made. And they precipitated the first of the 'Special Comments,' written by hand on the back of a travel itinerary on a flight delayed at Los Angeles."

[replay of 'Special Comment' from August 30, 2006]

Announcer, at 8:25 p.m.: "From dissent and disloyalty to an outright disconnect with reality. As the midterm election neared, desperate times called for desperate accusations. Presidential charges against Democrats that carried no truth at all: A 'Special Comment' on the Bush administration's problem with the facts when we return."

[Special Comments from October 5 and November 6 were played last]

CNN Highlights AP's Bias: Arrested Illegals
Called 'Victims'

Filling in for Lou Dobbs on Friday night, CNN's Kitty Pilgrim highlighted a case of bias at the "supposedly objective" Associated Press, which led a dispatch about the federal roundup Tuesday of workers at meatpacking plants, by referring to how "hordes of police" had "stormed" the plants, but "the illegal workers arrested may not have been the only victims." Pilgrim marveled: "That's right, the Associated Press calling illegal aliens -- including some charged with stealing the identities of hundreds of Americans -- it called them 'victims.'"

Indeed, in a Friday morning AP dispatch as posted by Yahoo, "Immigration raids may affect meat prices," the AP's Roxana Hegeman led her Wichita-datelined story: "When hordes of police and immigration officials stormed meatpacking plants in six states this week, the illegal workers arrested may not have been the only victims. Consumers and the industry itself may be feeling the repercussions in a shortage of meatpackers, higher wage costs and, ultimately, higher prices for the beef that lands on America's tables at home and in restaurants...."

For the AP story in full: news.yahoo.com

[This item was posted Friday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Pilgrim's short item toward the end of the first half hour of the December 15 Lou Dobbs Tonight:
"This broadcast is often criticized for taking a position on issues such as illegal immigration and border security. Well, here's how the supposedly objective Associated Press covered Tuesday's immigration raids on Swift Company meatpacking plants. In a story from Wichita, Kansas, and reprinted across the country, the AP reported that [text on screen under "Media Bias?"] 'hordes of police and immigration officials stormed meatpacking plants in six states this week, the illegal workers arrested may not have been the only victims.' That's right, the Associated Press calling illegal aliens -- including some charged with stealing the identities of hundreds of Americans -- it called them 'victims.'"

NBC Argues 'Clinton Years' Economy Better
than Current Economy

On Saturday's NBC Nightly News, while filing a story on the "mind-boggling" bonuses going to those who are "striking it rich" on Wall Street, correspondent Mike Taibbi downplayed the strength of the current economy in comparison to the "Clinton years," and also pointed out the "struggle" of "working Americans." While Taibbi argued that his reference to the "Clinton years" was a "chronological, not political distinction," he praised that period for "lifting more boats" while finding fault in the present. Taibbi: "But to many, today's version of the haves and have-nots feels different. In the boom of the Clinton years -- and I'm talking a chronological, not a political distinction -- the rising tide of that bull market truly did lift all boats, or at least a whole lot more of them."

[This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Sunday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Before a commercial break, NBC News anchor John Seigenthaler plugged the story on Wall Street's "holiday bonuses worth more than most Americans earn in a lifetime." After introducing the story about Wall Street "handing out the kind of bonuses most Americans can only dream about," Taibbi began his report. Taibbi relayed the "mind-boggling" bonuses of some on Wall Street, and then made reference to the 1987 movie Wall Street which had taken on corporate greed and corruption.

After playing a clip of Michael Douglas' character Gordon Gekko claiming that "greed is good," Taibbi continued: "But to many, today's version of the haves and have-nots feels different. In the boom of the Clinton years -- and I'm talking a chronological, not a political distinction -- the rising tide of that bull market truly did lift all boats, or at least a whole lot more of them."

The NBC correspondent then moved on to highlight the financial plight of a finance assistant who does not get bonuses as she complained of living "paycheck to paycheck." Taibbi elaborated: "Working Americans now pay more of their pension and health care costs; and food, fuel and service costs have risen faster than most salaries. That means even those who do get small bonuses still struggle."

After showing a clip of one man saying that his bonus would go toward "putting food on the table," Taibbi provided merely one soundbite to defend large bonuses in the form of Wall Street headhunter Brian Drum who argued that "you have to have that incentive."

Below is a complete transcript of the story from the December 16 NBC Nightly News:

John Seigenthaler, before commercial break: "When NBC Nightly News continues this Saturday, striking it rich on Wall Street. Holiday bonuses worth more than most Americans earn in a lifetime."

Seigenthaler: "NBC News 'In Depth' tonight: Holiday bonuses. Big celebrations on Wall Street this week as companies handed out the kind of bonuses most Americans can only dream about. Here's some perspective: Most U.S. businesses -- 66 percent -- give no bonuses at all. Those employees lucky enough to receive a cash gift will get an average of $837. Compare that to the bonuses Goldman-Sachs gives out, a jackpot so big they could give every employee more than $600,000. But that's nothing compared to what some are actually getting. NBC's Mike Taibbi takes you behind the numbers 'In Depth.'"

Mike Taibbi: "It's bonus week on Wall Street, and the numbers are mind-boggling. Thousands of banking, investment and hedge fund pros getting from the low to the high six figures. One company, Goldman-Sachs, paying out over $16 billion in bonuses. And one executive, Morgan Stanley's CEO John Mack, getting $40 million -- and he won't be alone in that rare air. There are a lot of other CEOs making the same jump, says CNBC business guru Jim Cramer, by simply trading paper."
Jim Cramer, CNBC: "There is very little creation of business. There's creation of profits, but for the most part these brokerage houses just shuffle from one group of people who are rich to another group of people who are richer."
Taibbi: "Those big bonuses have triggered an impulse buyers' market for high-end property and possessions like the BMWs Paul Simon sells."
Paul Simon, car dealer: "It's almost like kids in a toy store. It's great to see."
Taibbi: "So what's new? Twenty years ago Gordon Gekko, in the movie Wall Street, sounded the mantra."
Michael Douglas, as Gordon Gekko from movie Wall Street: "Greed, for lack of a better word, is good."
Taibbi: "But to many, today's version of the haves and have-nots feels different. In the boom of the Clinton years -- and I'm talking a chronological, not a political distinction -- the rising tide of that bull market truly did lift all boats, or at least a whole lot more of them."
Gloria Rodriguez, finance assistant: "It's frustrating sometimes that you work so hard and you don't get anything."
Taibbi: "Most employees, including finance assistant Gloria Rodriguez, don't get bonuses."
Rodriguez: "You live paycheck by paycheck just to pay for mortgages, gas, electric, everything. Even food. Even school for the kids."
Taibbi: "Working Americans now pay more of their pension and health care costs; and food, fuel and service costs have risen faster than most salaries. That means even those who do get small bonuses still struggle."
Unidentified man: "With my holiday bonus, I'm going to put food on the table."
Taibbi: "Still, the bonuses are a way to keep score."
Brian Drum, Wall Street Headhunter: "There's always going to be somebody trying to figure out a way to make the big bucks, and I think that's part of the system. I say you have to have that incentive."
Taibbi: "And this year, that incentive includes bonuses 10 to 15 percent bigger than last year -- at least. Mike Taibbi, NBC News, New York."

WPost Mildly Calls Bush-Hating Ballet
a Work of 'Zealous Gadfly'

In the era of Bill Clinton, the liberal media was not shy about locating "Clinton haters." In March of 1994, Washington Post reporter Ann Devroy reported from the front of conservatism, "Bill Clinton's enemies are making their hatred clear, with a burning intensity and in some case with an organized passion." She listed as haters Rush Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, and so on. But the Post doesn't seem to use the term "Bush hater," even when Bush haters are dancing right in front of them.

See Monday's Style section for a feature on a Bush-hating ballet. Susan Kaufman's review of a Kennedy Center performance by the Paul Taylor Dance Company is mildly headlined "Paul Taylor, Hitting Close To Home: At His 'Banquet of Vultures,' George Bush Is the Centerpiece." What a treat, another "antiwar" artist trashing the warmongers, with Bush cast as uncaring about troop deaths, and even committing one himself.

Web page for the dance group: www.ptdc.org

Kaufmann's Washington Post "Style" section review: www.washingtonpost.com

[This item, by Tim Graham, was posted Monday morning on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]

Kaufman wrote: "If anyone doubted who the savage character in the suit and tie was supposed to represent in Paul Taylor's unsparingly brutal antiwar work 'Banquet of Vultures,' Taylor himself minced no words in explaining.
"'Frankly, the guy in the red tie is Bush,' the ordinarily reticent choreographer told the audience during a discussion after Friday's richly textured performance of the Paul Taylor Dance Company at the Kennedy Center Eisenhower Theater. Taylor said he was inspired to create a dance focusing on President Bush after watching him move.
"'The first time I saw Bush walking, on television, I did not trust the man,' he said. 'His walk is a lie.
"'Walks are like fingerprints,' he continued. 'They tell a lot about us. And this one was not sincere.'"

This matches the Jonathan Chait standard of Bush hate, even hating the way a man walks. But the Post seems to delight in the distaste, and how it unravels on a stage almost walking distance from the White House. Taylor is not a "hater," but merely a colorful speaker, a zealous gadfly:
"Taylor's own body language, his animated demeanor, his very willingness to speak colorfully in a large public forum made clear how pleased this native Washingtonian was that 'Banquet of Vultures' -- an obvious denunciation of the Iraq war and the politicians who started it, a work that Taylor created last year -- was being seen just a short hop from the White House.
"Despite the wholesome athletic appearance of the dancers he hires, and despite the generally upbeat nature of his works, Taylor harbors the zealous heart of a gadfly. He likes to shock."

The idea that Taylor is a gadfly, and not a hater, collapses when Kaufman attempts to describe what happens on stage. The ballet casts Bush as evil: "The wellspring of evil is within the human heart -- particularly, in 'Banquet,' in the heart that holds the power." Taylor is painting Bush not only as loathsome, but as a rapist and murderer

Kaufman relayed: "Taylor puts his self-described presidential figure right in the middle of the battlefield, watching stonily as agonies fell the troops. Trusnovec, all angles and edges, dances the [Bush] role with surgical exactitude, and his eyes were sharpest of all, cold and unflinching. After he violates a female recruit, kills her and tosses her aside, the spotlight shifts upstage to a second power figure in a suit and tie. Wracked as if by inner demons, throwing himself to the stage and rising again, this man is has a clear identity as well: He'll be the next sicko to wage war."

Kaufman did conclude she would not want to see it again, since it was too end-of-the-world for her, and "In its obvious topicality, it lost complexity. It was not easy on the ear with its screeching score," and ultimately the Bush-bashing was too unsurprisingly familiar.

Especially if you work at the Washington Post.

-- Brent Baker