In Midst of Bad News for Repubs, NBC Highlights Falling Polls --10/4/2006

1. In Midst of Bad News for Repubs, NBC Highlights Falling Polls
In the midst of a period when the news media have been aggressively delivering bad news for Republicans and conservatives, NBC News decided to take a poll which found the news agenda has had an impact. On Tuesday's NBC Nightly News, anchor Brian Williams indirectly acknowledged the media's role, asking Tim Russert: "On the big issue of Iraq, since we last polled on it, we had that Defense intelligence report come out and now this Woodward book. It's all over the media. What are the findings in the numbers?" (Indeed, Williams was so enthused about Woodward's book that he led his newscast last Thursday by plugging CBS's interview with Woodward a day before the CBS Evening News got to it.) Russert relayed how the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey found that when asked "what effect is the war in Iraq having on war on terror?", only 32 percent said "helping" while 46 percent replied "hurting." Russert emphasized: "Measure that to one month ago and look at the change: A 14 percent increase in the number of people -- from 32 to 46 -- who believe the Iraq war is hurting the war on terror." On job approval, Bush's is down to 39 percent in the poll.

2. Borger Breaks PC Code, Relays Claim 'Gay Network' Protected Foley
CBS News reporter Gloria Borger on Tuesday night broached a subject which political correctness would advise she avoid. In a CBS Evening News story about the latest developments in the Mark Foley case, she relayed the view that Foley's sexual orientation helped protect him from scrutiny: "There's a secondary story here, one that rank and file Republicans will only talk about privately: That it was common knowledge that former Congressman Foley was gay and not discreet. One senior House Republican tells CBS that there's a lot of anger at what he describes as 'a network of gay staffers and gay members who protect each other and did the Speaker a disservice.'" Borger concluded: "Republicans worry that their voters could well decide to sit this election out if they're disgusted, and that could mean the party loses control of the House."

3. Morning Shows Hail WTimes Dump-Hastert Editorial, GOP in 'Crisis'
Network morning shows stayed on the Mark Foley scandal on Tuesday. ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN all harped on the "conservative" Washington Times editorial calling for Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign. (The Times is conservative, but no one expects the networks to describe the liberal newspapers -- or themselves -- with an ideological label.) ABC's Brian Ross came on strong, suggesting the Republican problem was "one of hypocrisy, talking tough about going after pedophiles on the Internet but not doing much about it when it comes to one of their own." CBS's Hannah Storm wondered if the scandal would "take down the Republican leadership in the House." NBC's Tim Russert used a rare P-word quoting a panicked Republican: "If there's a perception that we overlooked perversion in order to hold on to power we are finished." And CNN brought on a braying Paul Begala and found Democrats were "particularly enjoying the fact" that House campaign chairman Thomas Reynolds was ensnared in the controversy.

4. Vieira Hits Ashcroft with Woodward's Claims, 'Moral Basis' of WOT
Former Attorney General John Ashcroft was invited aboard Tuesday's Today show to promote his book, Never Again, but he found himself talking about somebody else's book instead. In the 8:30am half hour, NBC's Meredith Vieira assaulted Ashcroft with excerpts from Bob Woodward's latest book and even went on to question Ashcroft about the "moral basis of the war on terrorism," and she asserted: "Many people feel that our civil liberties have been chipped away bit by bit since, since 9/11." Teasing the segment, Matt Lauer called Ashcroft "a very controversial figure," and in her opening Vieira noted he was "a lightning rod for criticism."

5. Rosie O'Donnell Exploits Amish Shooting to Push Gun Control
Well known liberal Rosie O'Donnell used the shooting at an Amish school in Pennsylvania as a springboard to promote gun control. O'Donnell, who famously sparred with Tom Selleck about her gun views on her old daytime show, got into a heated debate with Elisabeth Hasselbeck on Tuesday's edition of ABC's The View. O'Donnell charged that the tragic event should spur tighter restrictions: "I think the horror of imagining six to thirteen-year-old girls handcuffed together and shot execution style, one by one, is perhaps enough to awaken the nation that maybe we need some stricter gun control laws."

In Midst of Bad News for Repubs, NBC
Highlights Falling Polls

In the midst of a period when the news media have been aggressively delivering bad news for Republicans and conservatives, NBC News decided to take a poll which found the news agenda has had an impact. On Tuesday's NBC Nightly News, anchor Brian Williams indirectly acknowledged the media's role, asking Tim Russert: "On the big issue of Iraq, since we last polled on it, we had that Defense intelligence report come out and now this Woodward book. It's all over the media. What are the findings in the numbers?" (Indeed, Williams was so enthused about Woodward's book that he led his newscast last Thursday by plugging CBS's interview with Woodward a day before the CBS Evening News got to it.)

Russert relayed how the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey found that when asked "what effect is the war in Iraq having on war on terror?", only 32 percent said "helping" while 46 percent replied "hurting." Russert emphasized: "Measure that to one month ago and look at the change: A 14 percent increase in the number of people -- from 32 to 46 -- who believe the Iraq war is hurting the war on terror." On job approval, Bush's is down to 39 percent in the poll.

For the September 29 CyberAlert item, "NBC as CBS's PR Agent: Plugs 60 Minutes on Bush Iraq 'Deception,'" go to: www.mrc.org [1]

Russert also explained how, when asked "based on what you've been hearing and seeing these last few weeks, which party do you believe more favorably disposed to controlling Congress?" 34 percent say Democrats and "18 percent say more favorably disposed to the Republicans, 41 percent now less-favorably disposed to the Republicans."

[This item was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [2] ]

From the October 3 NBC Nightly News:

Brian Williams: "As this Foley scandal was beginning to sink in across the country with voters, a brand new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll was already in the works. Our Washington Bureau Chief, moderator of Meet the Press, Tim Russert with tonight us from Capitol Hill as well. Tim, first off before we get to the numbers, I know you continue to track the damage from this kind of thing."
Tim Russert, in DC: "Brian, rank and file Republican members back home in their districts are in a high state of anxiety. One said to me today, 'we came in as the guardians of family values. Unless our leaders fix this and fix it quickly, a lot of us could get taken down five weeks from today.'"
Williams: "Tim, to these numbers, it's important we say, our tracking started as this story started to track across the country. First off, the President."
Russert: "The President, Brian, is back down in the 30 percent approval rating -- it is a 39 percent, 56 percent disapproval. You see one month ago, it was 42 to 53. And Brian, look at this: We asked people, 'based on what you've been hearing and seeing these last few weeks, which party do you believe more favorably disposed to controlling Congress?' 34 percent say Democrats, 23 percent less favorable to Democrats. And here's the Republican number: 18 percent say more favorably disposed to the Republicans, 41 percent now less-favorably disposed to the Republicans based on what people have been hearing the last few weeks."
Williams: "Now Tim, on the big issue of Iraq, since we last polled on it, we had that Defense intelligence report come out and now this Woodward book. It's all over the media. What are the findings in the numbers?"
Russert: "Brian, the President has been insisting that the Iraq war is central to the war on terror and is very positive influence on that war. The American people now starting to differ. Look at these numbers. Exactly 'what effect is the war in Iraq having on war on terror?' Helping: 32; hurting: 46 percent. Measure that to one month ago and look at the change: A 14 percent increase in the number of people -- from 32 to 46 -- who believe the Iraq war is hurting the war on terror. Not the message the White House wants out five weeks to a mid-term election."
Williams: "The numbers are on the move with a month to go. Tim Russert on Capitol Hill in Washington tonight. Tim, as always, thanks."

MSNBC.com's story on the poll findings: www.msnbc.msn.com [3]

Borger Breaks PC Code, Relays Claim 'Gay
Network' Protected Foley

CBS News reporter Gloria Borger on Tuesday night broached a subject which political correctness would advise she avoid. In a CBS Evening News story about the latest developments in the Mark Foley case, she relayed the view that Foley's sexual orientation helped protect him from scrutiny: "There's a secondary story here, one that rank and file Republicans will only talk about privately: That it was common knowledge that former Congressman Foley was gay and not discreet. One senior House Republican tells CBS that there's a lot of anger at what he describes as 'a network of gay staffers and gay members who protect each other and did the Speaker a disservice.'" Borger concluded: "Republicans worry that their voters could well decide to sit this election out if they're disgusted, and that could mean the party loses control of the House."

[This item was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [4] ]

A transcript of Borger's story on the October 3 CBS Evening News with Katie Couric, picking up after her summary of comments from Foley's lawyer about how Foley was molested by a clergyman and how President Bush offered a show of support for Hastert:

Borger: "...But the Washington Times, a conservative newspaper, wanted Hastert's scalp, calling his management of the Foley scandal 'grossly negligent,' and accused him of 'giving phony answers' to questions about his internal investigation. Then Hastert's top lieutenant, John Boehner, jumped ship."
House Majority Leader John Boehner on WLW Radio in Cincinnati: "In my position, it's in his corner, it's his responsibility, the Clerk of the House who runs the page program, the page board all report to the Speaker, and I believed that had it had been dealt with."
Borger: "Sources tell CBS News that members were equally blunt with Hastert on a conference call last night in which some called for an end to the page program. And others called for him to take some responsibility, especially since Hastert's staff was first alerted to the initial Foley e-mails a year ago. 'What do I say back home?' one Republican asks. 'We need to change the subject.'
"But that's hard, especially when there's a secondary story here, one that rank and file Republicans will only talk about privately: That it was common knowledge that former Congressman Foley was gay and not discreet. One senior House Republican tells CBS that there's a lot of anger at what he describes as [text on screen] 'a network of gay staffers and gay members who protect each other and did the Speaker a disservice.' Republicans worry that their voters could well decide to sit this election out if they're disgusted, and that could mean the party loses control of the House."

Morning Shows Hail WTimes Dump-Hastert
Editorial, GOP in 'Crisis'

Network morning shows stayed on the Mark Foley scandal on Tuesday. ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN all harped on the "conservative" Washington Times editorial calling for Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign. (The Times is conservative, but no one expects the networks to describe the liberal newspapers -- or themselves -- with an ideological label.) ABC's Brian Ross came on strong, suggesting the Republican problem was "one of hypocrisy, talking tough about going after pedophiles on the Internet but not doing much about it when it comes to one of their own." CBS's Hannah Storm wondered if the scandal would "take down the Republican leadership in the House." NBC's Tim Russert used a rare P-word quoting a panicked Republican: "If there's a perception that we overlooked perversion in order to hold on to power we are finished." And CNN brought on a braying Paul Begala and found Democrats were "particularly enjoying the fact" that House campaign chairman Thomas Reynolds was ensnared in the controversy.

[This item, by Tim Graham, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [5] ]

Here's the rundown for October 3 from the MRC analyst team:

# ABC's Good Morning America. ABC could have been called the Amish Broadcasting Company on Tuesday. They devoted the first 15 minutes of Good Morning America to the school shooting in Pennsylvania's Amish country. When the newscast began, Claire Shipman went right to Foley:
"We begin with the latest on the shocking capitol hill email sex scandal. This morning the conservative Washington Times newspaper is calling on House Speaker Dennis Hastert to take Congressman Mark Foley's lead and step down. ABC's Brian Ross is here with the details."
Brian Ross: "Republicans in Congress are in crisis, having a hard time explaining why Foley's suspect behavior with pages went unchecked for at least five years. The Speaker of the House says he had no idea how bad it was until he saw Foley's X-rated emails on ABC News."

Since the X (or NC-17) rating at the movies is not usually about sex talk, but the visual presentation of intercourse, it would be hard to describe blocks of text as "X-rated." In fact, if hypocrisy is an issue, we could note that sex talk is quite common on regular broadcast and cable TV, and networks like ABC have a hard time even labeling it on their own screen. ABC even has Foley-style plot lines on Desperate Housewives. But the story continued:

Dennis Hastert: "No one in the Republican leadership saw those messages until last Friday when ABC News released them to the public."
Ross: "Yet there were warnings signs going back at least five years. Even as Foley gave this tearful farewell to the page class of 2002."
Foley, choking up at the end: "Cherish your youth, cherish this experience, but above all cherish your families. Let them know how much you appreciate them giving you this chance. And let them know how much you appreciate their love to make you the people you are."
Ross: "Some of the same pages in the chamber that day would later receive x-rated messages from Foley. He now says his lurid messages, full of graphic sexual language, too graphic to be broadcast, was the result of his lifelong battle with alcohol. His lawyer says he is in rehab."
David Roth, Mark Foley's attorney: "Mark is contrite, remorseful and devastated by the harm he has caused others and takes full responsibility for his actions. Mark blames no one but himself."
Ross: "But the issue for Republicans is becoming one of hypocrisy, talking tough about going after pedophiles on the internet but not doing much about it when it comes to one of their own. Hypocrisy typified by some of Foley's own statements, including one he made to John Walsh of America's Most Wanted, now coming back to haunt him."
Foley, in blurry video, perhaps from the Internet: "If I were one of these sickos, I've be nervous with America's Most Wanted on my trail."
Ross promised more: "A former top Republican official in Congress says there were other members whose behavior around pages was also suspect, and former pages have been busy providing new leads about just who those members are, Claire."
Shipman: "Alright, Brian, thank you. I don't think this story is going away any time soon. We do want to make clear that for the second day in a row, Speaker of House Dennis Hastert was invited to appear on Good Morning America but he declined our invitation."

# CBS's Early Show: MRC's Mike Rule reported the Early Show had two stories in the first half-hour on Foley, a report by Sharyl Attkisson, and an interview with CBS chief political correspondent Gloria Borger. Julie Chen introduced the Attkisson report by noting: "The FBI says it had copies of inappropriate e-mails former Congressman Mark Foley sent to teenage pages back in July, but there was no investigation because top Republicans said they would handle it. Now the scandal may have far-reaching implications. CBS News Capitol Hill correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports."

Sharyl Attkisson: "Republicans have their new candidate but a win is a long shot and the focus is elsewhere, on Republican House leaders who knew about Foley's inappropriate contacts with pages more than a year ago. Shelley Capito, who helps oversee the page program, is demanding answers."
Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia Representative: "If there was a concerted effort to keep Mr. Foley in Congress for whatever reason, political or otherwise, then I think that will come to light in the FBI investigation."
Sharyl Attkisson: "Under fire from critics in both parties who say it smells like a cover-up, House Speaker Dennis Hastert defended himself saying he didn't know the extent of Foley's contacts with young male former pages."
Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House: "Congressman Foley duped a lot of people."
Sharyl Attkisson: "Meantime, Foley checked himself into rehab."
David Roth, Attorney for Former Congressman Mark Foley: "Mark is contrite, remorseful and devastated by the harm he has caused others and takes full responsibility for his actions."
Sharyl Attkisson: "Ironically, Foley could find himself prosecuted under the very law that he helped write. It's called the 'Adam Lost Child Protection Act.' Among other things, the new law makes it harder for sexual predators to reach out to children on the internet. To speak to former pages like Blake Yocum, Foley's interest in the young students was practically legendary, but this story has been a surprise."
Blake Yocum, former congressional page: "I feel my close friends who were pages, you know, suspected that Congressman Foley was homosexual but not necessarily, you know, we never suspected pedophilia out of Congressman Foley."
Sharyl Attkisson: "It'll take time before we know what, if anything, Foley will be charged with. Some of that depends on whether he actually tried to meet up with or solicit the teens he was in contact with. Sharyl Attkisson, CBS News, Capitol Hill."

Co-host Hannah Storm projected the thought that the Foley scandal could "take down" the GOP House leadership:
"Will the scandal surrounding former Republican Congressman Mark Foley, who faces a criminal probe concerning a sexually suggestive e-mails to teenage pages, take down the Republican leadership in the House? And how will it impact the mid term elections which are just five weeks away? Gloria Borger is CBS News National Political Correspondent. Good morning Gloria."
Gloria Borger: "Good morning Hannah."
Hannah Storm: "Well Gloria, this morning in the conservative Washington Times in an editorial, they're calling for House Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign. They're saying that either he was grossly negligent for not seeing the red flags and ordering an immediate investigation or that he deliberately looked the other way, hoping this would go away. So, how much pressure is there on Hastert and other Republican leaders who may have known about this scandal to resign today?"
Gloria Borger: "Well, I think they're feeling an awful lot of pressure from their rank and file. Obviously this editorial by the conservative Washington Times doesn't help it. I think the Republicans in the House are in a pickle here, Hannah, because this is just five weeks before an election. So the question is, do you keep Denny Hastert and his lieutenants in charge because the election is so close and you don't want to shake the boat? Or, on the other hand, do you have to show your base support, those cultural conservative voters, that you hear them, that you hear that they're upset, and force Denny Hastert to step aside? I think that's a decision that the rank and file has to make right now. You know, they've got five weeks, and they've got a 15-seat margin they need to defend. So they've got a lot of work to do."
Hannah Storm: "And, what impact do you think that it will have on the elections? Will this story have legs and could it, perhaps, be the tipping point in the election? Could it cost the Republicans the House?"
Gloria Borger: "You know, as Howard Baker always used to say, overnight is a lifetime in politics, and this sure was a lifetime. Obviously, they believe they've lost the Foley seat. Every seat is gold when you're defending these 15 seats. And now there are some reports and some polls that show that they virtually conceded another four or five of those seats. So they are really, really, really in a tough spot. They're going to have to spend an awful lot of money defending Republicans in tight races. And they don't want to be asked questions about how the party of values and how a party who talks about moral values can have let this issue go on for more than a year without doing anything about it."
Hannah Storm: "Right. Obviously, the Republicans would rather focus on things where they excel, like national security. So, how do we see this impacting, perhaps, the Senate races as well?"
Gloria Borger: "Well, you know, there is going to be a spillover. There could be a sense, if the public gets really disgusted by all of this, they don't trust members of Congress, they think members of Congress are corrupt, and now you have this Mark Foley story, there could be a sense that they're all a bunch of hypocrites and that maybe you ought to throw all the bums out. And that could affect, ironically, some Democrats as well as some Republicans. Right now, obviously, this is focused on the House of Representatives. But you saw even the president's spokesman yesterday calling these e-mails abhorrent, everybody wanting to distance themselves from what Mark Foley did. And, there's one thing we don't know yet, Hannah, and that is whether we're going to discover that there's more to this Mark Foley problem than we knew, whether there are more pages involved, or even more members of Congress. We just don't know yet."

# NBC's Today: MRC's Geoff Dickens noticed the show led off again with Foley fallout. Meredith Vieira declared: "Political firestorm. House Speaker Dennis Hastert under scrutiny after a leading conservative newspaper calls for his resignation over his handling of the congressional e-mail scandal."

A few seconds later, Matt Lauer repeated for emphasis: "We're also gonna have the latest on that scandal that seems to be engulfing Washington or at least it's the talk of that town. A former Congressman accused of sexually, or sending sexually explicit emails to teenage male interns. It's already cost him his career but how many other Republicans could be forced out in this growing scandal? And what does it mean for the midterm elections? We'll talk with Tim Russert about that."

When the news break came at 7:11am, anchor Natalie Morales brought in the Times editorial: "More fallout from the investigation into former Congressman Mark Foley and sexually suggestive emails he sent to teenage boys. The conservative paper the Washington Times today is calling on Dennis Hastert to resign as House speaker claiming he was either negligent or looked the other way. We're gonna have more on this in a few minutes."

Four minutes later, more emphasis from Lauer: "Now to those allegations swirling around former Republican Congressman Mark Foley and emails sent to young male congressional pages. This morning a prominent conservative newspaper is calling on House Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign, claiming he didn't do enough to investigate Foley. NBC's Chip Reid covers Congress for us." Reid's report was straightforward, with this conclusion:
"Many former pages say they're stunned by the Foley scandal because it doesn't reflect their experience at all."
Unidentified former page: "The entire time I was in the page program I never felt threatened. I felt very safe."
Reid: "Now more than 20 years ago Congress revamped the page program after a sex scandal, now they say they'll have to do it again. Matt."

Matt Lauer then turned to Russert to measure the panic meter:

Lauer: "On the political Richter scale what is this story now and what does it have the potential to turn into?"
Russert: "Matt amongst Republicans on Capitol Hill it's 9 heading to 10. They are panicked. As one said to me yesterday, 'If there's a perception that we overlooked perversion in order to hold on to power we are finished.'"

After Russert described how the House leaders say they merely saw e-mails and didn't see a massive problem, he added: "What Republicans are saying and Democrats are saying is even if you saw just the first e-mail and not the text messages it was enough to say, 'Hold on, this is inappropriate. Let's investigate because other incidences may occur and people may come forward.'" Then the cynicism kicked in:

Lauer: "And so the most cynical scenario, the worst case scenario for Republicans is that they kept this under wraps because Foley's seat was important to holding control of the House at a time when the entire control issues was up for grabs in the midterm elections?"
Russert: "Absolutely and the Democrats are saying, now, 'If we had been brought into this and said this is a problem with the page program, let's look at it in a non-partisan way, this would not be the scandal it is.'"
Lauer: "And, by the way, there's another side to this. Congressman Foley made a rather sizeable donation to the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee of about $100,000 earlier in the summer. This came to that committee just a short time before these e-mails would've surfaced to that committee, also."
Russert: "Again, Matt, it begs the question why were the political people of the House Republican Party involved and not a bipartisan page program being examined."
Lauer: "Now we're five weeks away from the midterm elections. Tim, investigations take time. So is this gonna kind of unfold in time to truly impact those elections?"
Russert: "Well, well it probably won't come to closure. The Justice Department is investigating but as a Republican said to me yesterday, Matt, 'When it came to Iraq we could say to our constituents, the Democrats don't have a plan either. This one,' he said, 'they get.' This is, if it's perceived to be a coverup to hold on to power, they will say, 'Well there is no alternative other than throw these guys out.'"
Lauer: "And, and does this resonate with voters? There are some stories, Tim, and you and I know this that, that we talk about a lot and they talk about a lot inside Washington but you get out to Des Moines and Little Rock and Seattle and it doesn't make that big a difference. How's this rate?"
Russert: "I can only quote congressmen who went home this weekend. They say the first three questions they were asked about was, 'page scandal, page scandal, page scandal.' And Matt, Christian conservatives, the base of the Republican Party, the fear is that they will stay home. They're turnout will be depressed. And if they stay home-"
Lauer: "Yeah but Tim-"
Russert: "-Republicans are in trouble."
Lauer: "Ten seconds. Are they gonna stay home and risk a Democrat taking a seat in their home district?"
Russert: "That's the magical question. If you can answer that, you can predict the outcome five weeks from today."

They didn't wonder why a conservative Christian would let a liberal Democrat win a House or Senate seat and implement the libertine left's political agenda because one bad GOP apple sent creepy Internet messages.

# CNN's American Morning: MRC's Scott Whitlock noticed that CNN's American Morning featured jubilant Democrats as well as the mention of the "conservative Washington Times."

Miles O'Brien: "With the election 35 days away, the Foley scandal is creating a political opportunity for Democrats, meaning it's time to make some new campaign commercials. American Morning's Bob Franken joining us live from Washington with more. Good morning, Bob."
Franken: "Good morning, Miles. Yes, there is a new sport at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. It's called table turning. The White House was the setting in July as President Bush signed the Child Safety and Protection Act; among the honored guests, Congressman Mark Foley. And that's providing an opportunity for Democrats who have been the target of Republican attack ads like this one that ran in Indiana."
Unidentified female: "Can you imagine a suspected child rapist being captured in Vanderburg (ph) County but then mistakenly released by Brad Ellsworth's sheriff's department? At the time Sheriff Ellsworth, whose department released the suspect, was in Washington, campaigning for Congress."
Paul Begala (labeled simply as "political contributor"): "The Republicans, for a long time have acted like they have a monopoly on virtue, that somehow they're closer to God or children, or to families. That's nonsense. Neither party has a monopoly on that."
Franken: "And Democrats are particularly enjoying the fact one of the Republicans ensnared in this controversy, is the chairman of the party's congressional campaign committee, New York Representative Tom Reynolds. Meanwhile, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and the Congressional Page Board Chairman John Shimkus portrayed themselves as victims, too, of Foley's deceit."

It's a bit surprising that Franken would so openly declare that Democrats are "enjoying" a scandal which revealed pages were at risk of being approached by lecherous Congressmen. Miles O'Brien did get around to promoting the Washington Times editorial:
"Also in Washington this morning, Republicans waking up to some unwelcome words. The conservative Washington Times newspaper is calling on the House Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign. CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider joining us now from the bureau, talk a little bit more about this. Good morning, Bill. Good to have you with us."
Schneider: "Thanks, Miles."
O'Brien: "I want to read, for folks, just a little brief excerpt of this editorial in the Times. It says this: 'Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once. Either he was grossly negligent or he deliberately looked the other way in hopes that a brewing scandal would simply blow away.' Will this move to force Hastert to step down? Will it gain much traction, do you think?"
Schneider: "What we're seeing is a lot of anger and criticism coming, not just from Democrats, as Bob Franken just reported, but now also from conservatives and Republicans. The Washington Times editorial page being a very much a conservative voice, Richard Viguerie, who has always been closely associated with the social conservative movement -- they're demanding, some of them, Viguerie, among others, that Hastert and other leaders resign. A lot of members of the House Republican leadership find themselves in serious political trouble right now. Partly because of a revolt from the right, not just the left."
O'Brien: "When you start talking about social conservatives, they have other issues here. They have kind of a laundry list of issues with Republicans right now."
Schneider: "They have a lot of grievances with the Republican Congress. They have been angry for sometime. They call it, Viguerie calls it the big government Republicans, who are running the country, at least through Congress. And he even includes President Bush in that criticism. They're angry about government spending and the huge deficits under a Republican-controlled Congress and White House. They're angry that Congress has failed to act about immigration. And not a few of them are angry over the Iraq war and the fact this doesn't seem to have any discernible outcome in the foreseeable future."

Conservatives are appalled at the rate of government spending growth under Bush, but Schneider didn't feel the need to actually look at how the deficits are lower than forecast. He went on to insist "a lot of people are angry because it looks like, smells like there might be a cover up. That the leadership of Congress wanted to cover this up in order to protect their partisan interests. They didn't want to lose the Foley seat. They didn't want to have a full-blown scandal, which is, of course, now exactly what they've got." Schneider added that Foley's district was definitely switching parties.

Vieira Hits Ashcroft with Woodward's
Claims, 'Moral Basis' of WOT

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft was invited aboard Tuesday's Today show to promote his book, Never Again, but he found himself talking about somebody else's book instead. In the 8:30am half hour, NBC's Meredith Vieira assaulted Ashcroft with excerpts from Bob Woodward's latest book and even went on to question Ashcroft about the "moral basis of the war on terrorism," and she asserted: "Many people feel that our civil liberties have been chipped away bit by bit since, since 9/11."

Teasing the October 3 segment, Matt Lauer called Ashcroft "a very controversial figure," and in her opening Vieira noted he was "a lightning rod for criticism." Hmm, I wonder how many times Today referred to Janet Reno in those terms?

[This item, by Geoffrey Dickens, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters: newsbusters.org [6] ]

Squeezing out at least one more segment spawned by Woodward's book, Vieira's first four questions were based on claims from State of Denial. The following is a full transcript of the interview on the October 3rd edition of NBC's Today show:

Meredith Vieira: "When John Ashcroft served as President Bush's Attorney General he was known for his tough approach to fighting terrorism in the months after 9/11 but he was also a lightning rod for criticism. Now he's written a book about his years in Washington titled, Never Again: Securing America and Restoring Justice. Mr. Ashcroft, good morning to you, thanks for joining us."
John Ashcroft: "Well it's my pleasure."
Vieira: "Before we talk about your book I want to talk about a meeting that Bob Woodward reports in his book between then CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. Woodward writes that Tenet met with Rice on July 10th, 2001 and that Tenet warned Rice of an impending al Qaeda threat. Secretary Rice has since said that there was a meeting but there was no dire warning given. Do you know anything about this meeting and were you ever warned about al Qaeda in the summer leading up to 9/11?"
Ashcroft: "Well the summer was full of warnings about al Qaeda but they, at least, for me, they focused on things like the Cole bombing, Daresalam, the embassy bombings and that kind of event. As a matter of fact I sort of pushed people back when they were talking to me and said, now what are we talking about here? Where's the evidence? What's, what's the nature of the threat? And they, they described it and I said is there any evidence, at least this is the inquiry I would make that there's a problem here in the United States. And people told me, 'no,' that this is, all the evidence points to overseas. Now if there had been such a meeting that-"
Vieira: "Had taken place."
Ashcroft: "-had taken place with Ms. Rice and she had been told that there was a domestic threat, that that was, you know, and that was the feature of the meeting I'm surprised that they wouldn't have such a briefing for the attorney general as well."
Vieira: "So you never heard of any domestic threat impending, at all?"
Ashcroft: "There was a lot of talk about threats, generally of the kind we had endured before but when you asked about is there any information that, any evidence, that the threat would be domestic the answer just simply was no."
[On screen graphic: "Justice For All? Ashcroft On Securing America"]
Vieira: "Woodward describes also a president who seems disengaged when it comes to talking about any negative side to the war on terror. Is that the George Bush that you remember?"
Ashcroft: "No."
Vieira: "Somebody who would not want to hear bad news?"
Ashcroft: "Well we had to give him bad news on more than one occasion and frankly in the book I talk about some of those occasions. I say that the President said yes and was pretty upset by the bad news but asked us to move forward and correct it. So that I don't see the President as someone who doesn't come to grips with bad news but he doesn't-"
Vieira: "You don't see the President as someone who would've knowingly lied to the American public about the war?"
Ashcroft: "Oh I certainly don't believe the President would knowingly lie to the American people. He would ask questions about specific terrorist suspects around the country, about cells in one part of the nation or another. And I, it would be my job to tell him what we had been able to do and-"
Vieira: "And what you hadn't."
Ashcroft: "-and what we hadn't been able to do."
Vieira: "I want to ask you about your book, Never Again, because the title, you say, comes from something that President Bush said to you on September, September 12th, 2001. What did he say to you and how did it change the way you looked at yourself and the Justice Department and your priorities?"
Ashcroft: "Well he just turned in one of those very small meetings in the, literally the hours after 9/11 and he said, 'Don't ever let this happen again.' Well the truth of the matter is the Justice Department has always been sort of a backward looking prosecution oriented institution. We tell people, in court, what happened and who was responsible. And when he said, 'Don't ever let this happen again,' it meant that yeah you're gonna continue to be a prosecutor but you've got to start looking forward."
Vieira: "In the years that you were Attorney General did you ever doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism?"
Ashcroft: "I never doubted the moral basis and I don't think the Patriot Act is as controversial as people want to make it. When it came up after five years of debate for reenactment 88 senators voted for it. You can't get 88 senators to agree that today is Tuesday."
Vieira: "But many people feel that our civil liberties have been chipped away bit by bit since, since 9/11."
Ashcroft: "Well I think that's an unfortunate feeling. I think what's happened is that our civil liberties have been secured. We are less likely to be attacked."
Vieira: "I gotta ask you before we go, when I said that I'd be interviewing today a few friends of mine said you gotta ask him about those statues that he covered up, the naked statues. Why did he do that and does he ever regret that he did it?"
Ashcroft: "Well, you know, there was a drape installed in the Justice Department not on a statue. It divided a room. There are literally, I don't know, there are dozens of statues around the department. They are in various states of, of being revealed. They, they were not, in any way, adjusted and the individuals who decided that we would be better served in setting with a drape in that context for television viewing and things like that did it on their own. I didn't make the decision. I don't-"
Vieira: "So you didn't want to cover up the statues?"
Ashcroft: "I didn't, I just wasn't involved in things like that. I didn't, you know, fortunately for me I didn't have to empty the wastebaskets every morning, I didn't sweep out the building and I didn't make decisions about where we had curtains and didn't have them."
Vieira: "John Ashcroft, the book is Never Again. Thank you so much for joining us."

Rosie O'Donnell Exploits Amish Shooting
to Push Gun Control

Well known liberal Rosie O'Donnell used the shooting at an Amish school in Pennsylvania as a springboard to promote gun control. O'Donnell, who famously sparred with Tom Selleck about her gun views on her old daytime show, got into a heated debate with Elisabeth Hasselbeck on Tuesday's edition of ABC's The View. O'Donnell charged that the tragic event should spur tighter restrictions: "I think the horror of imagining six to thirteen-year-old girls handcuffed together and shot execution style, one by one, is perhaps enough to awaken the nation that maybe we need some stricter gun control laws."

(For more on O'Donnell's 1999 clash with Selleck, go to the May 21, 1999 CyberAlert where you'll be able to stream a five-minute long, very small and low-quality 45 kbps RealPlayer clip: www.mediaresearch.org [7] )

[This item is adopted from a Tuesday posting, by Scott Whitlock, on the MRC's blog: newsbusters.org [8] ]

O'Donnell's assertion quickly led to an exchange with Hasselbeck, the program's token conservative, in which O'Donnell asserted that there is no right to own a gun:

Hasselbeck: "So you can't, you can't take way the right to, to bear arms."
O'Donnell: "Well, it's not really a right. There's debate as to what that-"
Hasselbeck: "It is a right. It's in our Constitution. It's the Second Amendment."
O'Donnell scolded Hasselbeck: "Well, let's talk instead of yell."
Hasselbeck: "I'm not yelling."

O'Donnell quickly expanded the discussion into an attack on the NRA: "I know that the Constitution has been interpreted many, many times. In our country the President puts his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution. In the United States there is debate over whether or not the right to bear arms includes the lobby organization of the NRA, allowing no rules and no registration and absolutely, sort of, carte blanche, to make guns available to Americans in a way they're not in the rest of the world."

Hasselbeck initially attempted to placate the comedian on the October 3 show, but quickly abandoned it in favor of a vigorous defense of the Second Amendment:
"There should be, there should be a middle ground. There should be a middle ground."
Walters: "Well, there are some gun control. I mean, without guns-"
O'Donnell: "Well, what about this? The firearm death rate among children in America 0 to 14 is 12 times higher then all 25 other industrialized nation combined. Combined."
Hasselbeck: "What about the fact that firearms, well, firearms are used 60 times more to defend people then they are to take a life in this country, too. That's another statistic. This is why we have the debate."

O'Donnell attempted to interrupt, but Hasselbeck quickly cut her off and delivered a second argument for the right to bear arms:
O'Donnell: "I know, but maybe-"
Hasselbeck: "These things confuse us as, as Americans, but, in, in the results of children dying kind of bring it to a front, they bring it right to a boil. And that's why we have this discussion. That should not happen. But you have to remember that people protect themselves. In the times of segregation, when there were bigoted officers out there trying to just rule over and have government tyranny, people had to defend themselves somehow and they did it with guns."

The liberal members of The View crew responded to Hasselbeck's firm arguments by resorting to typical liberal cliches:

O'Donnell: "You can find an automobile that has a VIN number, if an automobile is stolen and you can trace it back to where the person bought the car and who bought it."
Behar: "Don't tell them how to get it."
Hasselbeck: "You can. You can. I found out that I had a lemon that way."
O'Donnell: "You can buy a gun in America and it is not licensed. We can't trace who bought it, who owned it or who is responsible. That's wrong."

A few minutes later, the discussion turned to what would have happened if the shooter didn't have a gun. Once again, it was left to Hasselbeck to make the obvious point:

O'Donnell: "If the man had a knife and he walked in there and there were adult women there and the man said I would like the women to leave because I'm going to keep the girls, I guarantee you, if that man did not have a gun, the mothers who were the teachers in that school would never have left those children alone in that room. Never."
[Applause]
Hasselbeck: "What if they had a gun? What if, hang on, let's just flip it. I'm saying, let's discuss all sides. What if, What if those women had guns on them and were able to defend themselves?"
O'Donnell: "So you're saying, you think we should arm teachers?"
Hasselbeck: "I'm not saying teachers should be armed. I'm just giving you the flip side of this situation-"
O'Donnell: "But the flip side is you're saying-"
Hasselbeck: "-that is a lot of times guns are used to protect people, so we can't be so extreme."

Co-host Joy Behar, a short time later, brought up another liberal cliche about guns:
"I think people want to hunt, that's a right as you're describing with their rifles. Why do they need an AK--47? Are these deer in the Israeli army?"
[Applause]
Behar: "What is the purpose of a machine gun to hunt with? Now that should be outlawed. Do you agree?"
Walters: Most people do not hunt with-"
Hasselbeck: "I would agree with that. And if you're a good hunter, you don't need that type of weapon."
Walters: "They don't hunt with machine guns."

Yes, surprisingly, Barbara Walters provided the voice of reason. Hunters don't use machine guns to kill deer. But why would anyone expect Joy Behar to know that? All she knows about hunters are the grotesque stereotypes that people like Rosie O'Donnell propagate. O'Donnell demonstrated clear ignorance about firearms with her next point:
"But Barbara Walters. In America, it's shocking that one is able to purchase an AK-47."
Walters: I'm agreeing with you."
Behar: "Why do they have them?"
O'Donnell: "Right. Because it is a $6 billion industry. And they have way too much power in a democracy, if you ask me."

In fact, it is very difficult to purchase an AK-47. But, again, why expect Rosie O'Donnell to be knowledgeable about a subject? It's so much more fun to be emotional.

Hasselbeck's reply, and Rosie's closing comment, hinted that viewers have not seen the last of such fierce debates on the ABC program:

Hasselbeck: "Well, the problem is statistics too. Because if you have restrictions, um, on guns, are not showing the results we'd like. You know what I mean?"
O'Donnell: "Well, you're wrong, Elisabeth. And I'll give you all the information at the commercial. We're going to take a break and come back after this with more hot topics to annoy, I'm sure, a lot of people at home."

-- Brent Baker