Stahl, Who Derided Reagan, Lectures Dobbs for Criticizing Bush --5/7/2007

1. Stahl, Who Derided Reagan, Lectures Dobbs for Criticizing Bush
CBS's Lesley Stahl, in a 60 Minutes profile of CNN's Lou Dobbs aired Sunday night, expressed indignation over how Dobbs violates the supposed "fair and balanced" rule of journalism by revealing his disdain for President Bush, but Stahl has a long history of announcing her personal political views, including scorn for President Reagan and adulation of Hillary Clinton. When Dobbs confirmed he's "not a fan" of Bush -- "No, I'm not. Whether it's outsourcing, the war in Iraq, just disregard for our middle class" -- Stahl jumped in: "I'm sitting here saying to myself, 'This man runs a news show?' And you can just tell me you don't like the President. Woo." Stahl, an advocacy journalist long before Dobbs, wondered: "What about fair and balanced?" Back in January of 1989, when Reagan was still in office, Stahl told NBC's Bob Costas: "I predict historians are going to be totally baffled by how the American people fell in love with this man [Ronald Reagan] and followed him the way we did." Five years later, on the old America's Talking cable channel, she was appalled by how people were fooled by Reagan: "Here's a guy who fooled most of the people most of the time....He was a person who didn't understand the issues at all, and we know that for a fact....It's scary, because he led us off in the wrong direction." AUDIO&VIDEO [1] [1]

2. Olbermann's Anti-Bush Debate Take, Frets GOP Belligerent on Iran
During Thursday's Republican presidential debate, which was dominated by questions that sounded like they were made up by liberal bloggers, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, known for his many anti-conservative and anti-Bush rants, got to anchor the cable network's post-debate coverage. While the MSNBC anchor was relatively more subdued than usual, his anti-Bush bias still shined through as he interviewed several of the Republican candidates and asked them questions displaying his interest in whether the candidates were critical of President Bush. Olbermann also expressed concern that the Republican candidates appeared "very belligerent and very willing to turn to military solutions, at least keep them on the table on the subject of Iran."

3. MSNBC's Matthews Rationalizes Clinton Question from GOP Debate
While being interviewed on Friday's Today show by Meredith Vieira, MSNBC's Chris Matthews attempted to explain the rationale behind a bizarre question he posed to Republicans the night before at the debate he moderated. Matthews had asked the presidential candidates: "Seriously, would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?" Matthews defended his question: "If I offered that same question up to Democrats or independents, it would be kind of mixed on the independent side, and on the Democratic side they would be cheering like mad. So, it really is this sort of a cultural question about the Clintons that becomes so iconic. 'Do you like the ? Do you viscerally like them?'"

4. ABC's Stossel Links Gun Control to Higher Crime
On Friday's 20/20, ABC anchor John Stossel discussed the self-defensive benefits of gun ownership, debunking the myth that "gun control reduces crime." The segment aired during 20/20's recurring series, "Myths, Lies & Downright Stupidity," based on Stossel's book of the same title. Citing the recent Federal Appeals Court for DC ruling overturning Washington, D.C.'s ban on gun ownership, Stossel talked to the pro-gun plaintiff in the case, Tom Palmer, and pointed out that the murder rate in D.C. increased after the city's gun ban: "Since Washington's gun law passed, the murder rate actually increased, even while America's murder rate dropped. It's because guns can also save lives, says Palmer, as one saved his years ago in California." The ABC anchor cited the case of Kennesaw, Georgia's law that requires its citizens to own guns, relaying a local police officer's observations that crime had dropped after the law passed.

5. 'Top Ten Signs You're Watching a Bad Presidential Debate'
From the Late Show with David Letterman's Web site, the winning entries in last week's "Top Ten Contest" for the "Top Ten Signs You're Watching a Bad Presidential Debate."

Stahl, Who Derided Reagan, Lectures Dobbs
for Criticizing Bush

Back in January of 1989, when Reagan was still in office, Stahl told NBC's Bob Costas: "I predict historians are going to be totally baffled by how the American people fell in love with this man [Ronald Reagan] and followed him the way we did." Five years later, on the old America's Talking cable channel, in an interview with Roger Ailes, she was appalled by how people were fooled by Reagan: "Here's a guy who fooled most of the people most of the time....He was a person who didn't understand the issues at all, and we know that for a fact....It's scary, because he led us off in the wrong direction." See: www.mrc.org [6]

Days after Reagan died in 2004, on CNN's Larry King Live, her 60 Minutes colleague Mike Wallace was curious about "when was the last time we had a President Americans loved?" Stahl doused the admiration of Reagan: "And of course, not all Americans loved him, Mike." See the June 15, 2004 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org [7]

Stahl hasn't hesitated to hail Hillary Clinton. In 1999, Philadelphia Inquirer TV columnist Gail Shister relayed how, "when it comes to Hillary Clinton, CBS's Lesley Stahl makes no pretense of objectivity." Indeed, the former White House reporter told Shister: "I'm endlessly fascinated by her...She's so smart. Virtually every time I've seen her perform, she has knocked my socks off." See the December 9, 1999 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org [8]

Humorously, in a January of 2000 interview with FNC's Bill O'Reilly, Stahl insisted: "I had my opinions surgically removed when I became a network correspondent." See the January 27, 2000 CyberAlert: www.mrc.org [9]

And Stahl hardly showed much respect for President Bush in a 2004 interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews in which she asserted that "we all suppose and assume" that Vice President Cheney "is sitting in the room and kind of hand-signaling to the President about what he's supposed to do." See the May 4, 2004 CyberAlert: www.mediaresearch.org [10]

[This item was posted Monday morning on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [11] ]

From the end of the May 6 60 Minutes piece on Dobbs:

Lesley Stahl: "Given his family [married to a Mexican-American], the crusade against illegal immigrants may seem like a disconnect. But Lou is full of contradictions: he's pro-abortion rights, but against gun control; a fiscal conservative who supports government regulation. He was a registered Republican."
Stahl to Lou Dobbs: "George Bush, not a fan?"
Dobbs: "No, I'm not. Whether it's outsourcing, the war in Iraq, just disregard for our middle class. I cannot-"
Stahl: "I'm sitting here saying to myself, 'This man runs a news show?'"
Dobbs: "I do."
Stahl: "And you can just tell me you don't like the President. Woo."
Dobbs: "I, matter of fact, insist that the audience know where I come from."
Stahl: "What about fair and balanced?"
Dobbs: "I've never, Lesley, found the truth to be fair and balanced. I've found it to be-"
Stahl: "But, that's, but wait, what's the definition of 'journalism?' That that's in there. That has to be part of what a journalist is, is fair and balanced."
Dobbs: "I truly believe there's a non-partisan, independent reality."
Stahl: "But, it's your reality."
Dobbs: "It is my reality."
Stahl: "But, it's not 'the' reality."
Dobbs: "Well, how so?"
Stahl: "Dobbs scoffs at suggestions that his 'advocacy' tarnishes his credentials as a journalist."
Dobbs: "The idea that a reporter should be disqualified because he or she actually cares, actually isn't neutral about the well-being of the country and its people, that's absurd."

Olbermann's Anti-Bush Debate Take, Frets
GOP Belligerent on Iran

During Thursday's Republican presidential debate, which was dominated by questions that sounded like they were made up by liberal bloggers, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, known for his many anti-conservative and anti-Bush rants, got to anchor the cable network's post-debate coverage. While the MSNBC anchor was relatively more subdued than usual, his anti-Bush bias still shined through as he interviewed several of the Republican candidates and asked them questions displaying his interest in whether the candidates were critical of President Bush. Olbermann also expressed concern that the Republican candidates appeared "very belligerent and very willing to turn to military solutions, at least keep them on the table on the subject of Iran."

Thursday's debate occurred just over a week after Olbermann's "Special Comment" attack on Rudy Giuliani in which he accused the former mayor of "doing bin Laden's work for him" because Giuliani had argued that a Republican President would protect America more effectively than a Democratic President because a Democrat would "play defense" in the war on terrorism. After the debate, Olbermann expressed wonder as to why Giuliani early on made debate comments about Bill Clinton that sounded like an "olive branch" before the former Mayor later repeated his charge that a Democrat would have America "playing defense." Olbermann: "Was there a, did Mr. Giuliani correct course today? Did somebody send him a note under his door that said, 'Don't go out there and be nice to the Democrats under any circumstances?'" The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson suggested that the Mayor's soft comments on Bill Clinton were inspired by Giuliani's own marital problems.

For a rundown of Olbermann's April 25 tirade against Olbermann: www.mrc.org [12]

For a rundown of the silly and left-wing questions posed to the candidates, check the May 4 CyberAlert which includes video of Mitt Romney being asked, "What do you dislike the most about America?" Go to: www.mrc.org [13]

[This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Saturday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [14] ]

Below is a list of some of Olbermann's more notable comments and questions, live from the site of the debate at the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum, to the candidates during MSNBC's 9:30-11p EDT coverage following the May 3 debate:

# To Senator Sam Brownback, about 9:40pm: "Did you criticize President Bush's handling of our allies in relation to Iraq without mentioning the President, or were you being more critical of the execution of the war by others?"

# # To former Governor Mike Huckabee: "Was there, in your opinion, as there was at this desk, veiled criticism of the President's execution of the war in Iraq? You specifically referred to whether or not the generals on the ground had been listened to."

# To U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo: "This subject of Iran came up rather prominently. Were you surprised at the depth of emotion about this on the stage with you among the other candidates tonight?"

# To U.S. Representative Duncan Hunter, about 9:50pm: "I'm wondering again about this point of the, several of the candidates, yourself included, criticizing, to some degree, the execution of the war in Iraq, if not the President by name. Were you doing so when you discussed the need to, in your terms, further stand up the Iraqi Army?"

To Hunter: "Congressman Hunter, there is a, Howard Fineman suggested this, and I would concur with his analysis, that one of the headlines that might be taken from this debate, if not necessarily just nationally, certainly internationally, would be that your party, and the members of your party, even after what has not been certainly, minimally defined this way, an easy series of events in Iraq, was being very belligerent and very willing to turn to military solutions, at least keep them on the table on the subject of Iran. Do you think that was also one of today's headlines?"

# To Washington Post's Eugene Robinson, about 10:30pm: "Do you think also there is a, this is the point, I keep saying I'm going to ask about this, and I'm finally going to ask about it. Early on in this, we heard something that seemed to be an olive branch from Rudy Giuliani to the Democrats which, of course, is the last thing you would think conservatives and Republicans tuning in to watch this, certainly at this stage of this campaign, want to hear. He mentioned that neither party has a monopoly on virtue or vice, and later on came back when Chris raised the question about Hillary and Bill Clinton, he said that, of course, Bill Clinton being in the White House again would mean Hillary was elected President and that would mean we're back on defense on terrorism, again saying that President Bush, complimenting President Bush about being on offense on September 20, 2001, onwards. Was there a, did Mr. Giuliani correct course today? Did somebody send him a note under his door that said, 'Don't go out there and be nice to the Democrats under any circumstances?'"
Eugene Robinson, Washington Post: "You know, I actually took the 'virtue and vice' reference as an attempt at inoculation, not an olive branch. I took it as a way of saying, 'Well, gee, you know, many of us have been married three times, and have these messy, these messy private lives. And also, many of us, you know, dress up like women and get photographed doing it, so that's the way I took that, not so much as a peace offering."

MSNBC's Matthews Rationalizes Clinton
Question from GOP Debate

While being interviewed on Friday's Today show by Meredith Vieira, MSNBC's Chris Matthews attempted to explain the rationale behind a bizarre question he posed to Republicans the night before at the debate he moderated. Matthews had asked the presidential candidates: "Seriously, would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?"

Republicans laughed in unison, with Mitt Romney retorting: "You have got to be kidding."

[This item, by Brendan Jones, was posted Friday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [15] ]

On the May 4 Today, from the site of the debate, the Air Force One pavilion at the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum in Simi Valley, California, Matthews defended his question:
"I thought they all agreed they didn't want Clinton back in the White House. I thought that was an interesting response. Because, I thought, you know, Republicans are having a hard time uniting and one thing they unite around is they don't want the Clintons back in the White House. And yet when you say, 'What do you think about Bill Clinton back in the White House?' they all sort of guffawed. Well, that's a particularly Republican response."
"If I offered that same question up to Democrats or independents, it would be kind of mixed on the independent side, and on the Democratic side they would be cheering like mad. So, it really is this sort of a cultural question about the Clintons that becomes so iconic. 'Do you like the Clintons? Do you viscerally like them?'

ABC's Stossel Links Gun Control to Higher
Crime

On Friday's 20/20, ABC anchor John Stossel discussed the self-defensive benefits of gun ownership, debunking the myth that "gun control reduces crime." The segment aired during 20/20's recurring series, "Myths, Lies & Downright Stupidity," based on Stossel's book of the same title. Citing the recent Federal Appeals Court for DC ruling overturning Washington, D.C.'s ban on gun ownership, Stossel talked to the pro-gun plaintiff in the case, Tom Palmer, and pointed out that the murder rate in D.C. increased after the city's gun ban: "Since Washington's gun law passed, the murder rate actually increased, even while America's murder rate dropped. It's because guns can also save lives, says Palmer, as one saved his years ago in California."

The ABC anchor cited the case of Kennesaw, Georgia's law that requires its citizens to own guns, relaying a local police officer's observations that crime had dropped after the law passed. Lieutenant Craig Graydon, Kennesaw Police Department: "Well, after the city ordinance passed, there was actually a decrease in reported crime in the Kennesaw area, especially violent crime." Stossel described two instances in which guns were used by law-abiding citizens to stop criminals, including students at the Appalachian School of Law who went to their cars and retrieved their guns after a gunman attacked their school in January 2002.

After relaying that the National Academy of Sciences "could not document a single gun regulation that reduced violent crime or murder," he concluded the story with a soundbite from pro-gun advocate Tom Palmer: "If someone gets into your house, which would you rather have, a handgun or a telephone? You can call the police if you want, and they'll get there, and they'll take a picture of your dead body. But they can't get there in time to save your life. The first line of defense is you."

[This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Saturday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [16] ]

Below is a complete transcript of the segment on gun control from the Friday May 4 edition of 20/20 on ABC which followed the Brian Ross DC prostitute story:

Elizabeth Vargas: "Now, it's time for our popular series 'Myths, Lies & Downright Stupidity,' which is also the title of John's best-selling book. It challenges conventional wisdom like 'stress causes gray hair.' Does it? And 'never eat out on Mondays.' Is that right?"

John Stossel: "Well, you'll find out now as we begin our top ten list, starting with number 10: 'Gun control reduces crime.' The horror of the shootings at Virginia Tech had many people talking about gun control."
John Roberts on CNN: "It's about the weapons, the guns. Where did the killer get them?"
Elizabeth Cohen on CNN: "They're shocked at how easy it is to purchase a gun."
Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA): "It is simply too easy to obtain a firearm."
Stossel: "The belief that gun control prevents gun crime is why many were upset this spring when-"
Unidentified male news anchor: "A bombshell court ruling could put handguns back in D.C. homes."
Stossel: "A court threw out Washington, D.C.'s 30-year ban on guns. And that's outrageous, said public officials."
Mayor Adrian Fenty (D-Washington, D.C.): "More guns very simply lead to more violence."
Tom Palmer, Washington, D.C. resident: "I don't know how anyone could be serious in saying that because the gun violence went up when they banned handguns."
Stossel: "Tom Palmer is one of the plaintiffs who sued D.C. over the right to have a gun. He's correct about gun violence going up. Since Washington's gun law passed, the murder rate actually increased, even while America's murder rate dropped. It's because guns can also save lives, says Palmer, as one saved his years ago in California."
Palmer: "We were walking on the street, and this group of young men took really strong exception to that. They stood up, 19 or 20 young guys, followed us, and they told us, 'We're gonna kill you. They'll never find the bodies.' And I turned around and showed them the business end of a pistol."
Stossel: "Just pulling out the gun was enough to stop them."
Palmer: "Yeah. It works. Merely having a weapon and being able to display it when I was threatened saved my life."
Stossel: "Now, you may think that carrying a gun, as Palmer did, is illegal in most of America, but it's not. Many people don't realize that today, in America, in about 40 states, it is legal to carry a concealed weapon on your person. And in those 40 states, there is no more violent crime or murder than in states where guns are restricted. The town of Kennesaw, Georgia, went a step further and passed a law requiring every household to have a gun. Did they then experience a crime wave? No."
Lieutenant Craig Graydon, Kennesaw Police Department: "Well, after the city ordinance passed, there was actually a decrease in reported crime in the Kennesaw area, especially violent crime."
Stossel: "Now, I don't want politicians ordering me to have a gun. And the law isn't enforced here. But townspeople we talked to liked the law."
Unidentified woman: "I think it makes people think twice."
Unidentified man #1: "This is a very peaceful place to be."
Unidentified man #2: "We should have guns. I mean, that's what free society do."
Stossel: "These maximum security felons said they fear an armed victim much more than the police."
Unidentified male prisoner: "When you go to rob somebody you don't know, it makes it harder."
Stossel: "And they said gun laws don't matter to them. They don't obey them."
Male prisoner: "I'm not worrying about the government saying that I can't carry a gun. I'm gonna carry a gun anyway."
Stossel: "It's impossible to know exactly how often guns stop criminals because who reports a crime that doesn't happen? But people use guns in self-defense every day. Often, just showing a gun is enough to prevent the crime. When robbers broke into Joyce and Raymond Papin's home and attacked Raymond, he yelled."
Raymond Papin: "Get the gun. Get the gun."
Stossel: "Joyce did. And when the robbers saw it, they ran away."
Papin: "Boy, when he saw the gun, he just started running, and they weren't just walking fast. They were running. They had boots on. You could hear them boots a'clopping."
Stossel: "Joyce says having a gun changes the balance of power. And here's a controversial idea: Some Virginia Tech students say they wish students had been allowed to carry guns because one of them might have stopped the killer before he shot so many people. And that's what happened five years ago at the Appalachian School of Law. Hearing shots, two students went to their cars, got their guns, and helped restrain this shooter until police arrested him."
Palmer: "One of the things that the gun does is it equalizes unequals. My mom told me when I was a young boy because she was armed she was never afraid."
Stossel: "So gun control isn't necessarily crime control. In fact, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed hundreds of studies and could not document a single gun regulation that reduced violent crime or murder."
Palmer: "If someone gets into your house, which would you rather have, a handgun or a telephone? You can call the police if you want, and they'll get there, and they'll take a picture of your dead body. But they can't get there in time to save your life. The first line of defense is you."

'Top Ten Signs You're Watching a Bad
Presidential Debate'

From the Late Show with David Letterman's Web site, the winning entries in last week's "Top Ten Contest" for the "Top Ten Signs You're Watching a Bad Presidential Debate." Late Show's home page: www.cbs.com [17]

10. Candidates allowed three minutes to answer, two minutes for rebuttal and one minute to make balloon animals (Patrick F, New York, NY)

9. Takes its questions exclusively from Trivial Pursuit: Disney Edition (Matt L, Westwood, MA)

8. Rebuttals consist of nothing but "Yo mama" jokes (David S, Owanka, SD)

7. They need to ask 5th graders to help them with the questions (John T, Oregon, OH)

6. Light on debating, heavy on free-style rap (Matt S, Santa Rosa Beach)

5. Candidates are each allowed to "phone a friend" (Lauren C, Mount Sterling, KY)

4. Debate drags on so long Giuliani is divorced and re-married twice (Ray L, Gainesville, VA)

3. Moderator Ryan Seacrest keeps flashing the text number to vote (Jaybeau J, Worcester, MA)

2. Hillary Clinton cannot answer health care questions but wins $500,000 by picking the correct briefcase (Marty M, Bassett, VA)

1. It's a bit too Kucinichy (Michael V, Stroudsburg, PA)

-- Brent Baker