....LMB: "Go Back to J-School, Bitch"....

October 11, 2002

Pretty sickening new report from our pals at FAIR.

Connie Chung: Skeptical of Skepticism

It describes an interview with Rep. Mike Thompson on CNN's Connie Chung Tonight. Key repulsive segments:

She then aired a clip from the speech that Bush made in Cincinnati:

"Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks.
"We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making, in poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September 11, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America."

After this soundbite, Chung continued: "Congressman, doesn't that tell you that an invasion of Iraq is justified?"

Thompson began to respond: "Connie, we haven't seen any proof that any of this has happened. I have sat through all the classified briefings on the Armed Services...."

She interrupted Thompson's answer, saying, "You mean you don't believe what President Bush just said? With all due respect....you know... I mean, what..."

What the hell are you talking about, Connie? The president's assertions are proof? Any decent journalist could take half a dozen cracks to the skull with a crowbar and still know that words aren't evidence.

And later, she spouted:

"Congressman Thompson, there are those who believe that you and your two colleagues who went to Iraq came back with the basic position of President Bush may be trying to tell you something that in his effort to get approval for an invasion in Iraq, that you shouldn't believe. So it sounds almost as if you're asking the American public, 'Believe Saddam Hussein, don't believe President Bush.' "

So in other words, since this Congressman finds all the anti-Iraq evidence he's seen unconvincing, he is obviously scheming with Saddam to destroy America, right?

FAIR's report then gives a link to what they think is a better, more thorough analysis than Chung's incredulous White House shilling, which you can read here.

Posted by Jake at 02:50 AM

Connie Chung has bought the Republican/AIPAC line - lock, stock and barrel. I've come to expect this from politicians, who sell their soul to the highest bidder, and AIPAC pays well...but from a journalist, I think it is galling and represents anti-discernment and pure emotion. She should have her impartial press credentials ripped from her hands for such a performance.

Connie Chung now joins a Congress of Bush-backing Republicans and AIPAC-lovin' Dems, among them, my representatives Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer and Nita Lowey. A lifelong leftist, none of these three will ever see my vote again because they have sacrificed the interest of the American people for the interests of a lobbying group. It is the lives of the American working and underclass who will fight their crusade - America's Career Army populated with Blacks and Latinos and poor whites. You're not gonna find an affluent Republican WASP or Zionist among the troopers. You simply won't...

I've been a longtime supporter of the state of Israel and consider myself one today...that will never change...but I would be a dishonest woman were I to say that extremist Israeli politics has nothing to do with their wrongheaded position.

I am appalled.

Posted by: lisa at October 11, 2002 09:57 AM

Connie Chung is a ninny. Does anyone even watch her show? I tried once and had to change the channel, the pain was too intense. What the hell was CNN thinking? The old "Live From _____" rocked.

Posted by: dack at October 11, 2002 10:48 AM

re. Lisa's comment:

"You're not gonna find an affluent Republican WASP or Zionist among the troopers. You simply won't..."

Hmm. While I can imagine that it is easier--hitting closer to home and all--for the poor and underclass to take exception to the Hawkish agenda, I would hope that any citizen, regardless of their income level or their stock portfolio, would--acting out of intellectual honesty and integrity--feel compelled to oppose the war.

Anyone who knows the facts about this situation should, ethically, desire to avoid war. I come from a WASP background, and I am horrified to the point of nausea at the possibility of armed conflict and loss of human life (let's just, for the moment, set aside the fact that we are already bombing Iraq).

For anyone with any integrity (provided they are armed with the facts and aren't just buying the corporate media dreck--which, I guess, is the big problem), war should be anathema, regardless of how much oil stock they have in their portfolio. If I had stocks or other investments, I wouldn't ever want them fattened on blood money--a value appreciation incurred by death and suffering. It's disgusting.

Then again, I tend towards having a little too much faith in people.


Posted by: michele at October 11, 2002 10:51 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Lying Media Bastards is both a radio show and website. The show airs Mondays 2-4pm PST on KillRadio.org, and couples excellent music with angry news commentary. And the website, well, you're looking at it.

Both projects focus on our media-marinated world, political lies, corporate tyranny, and the folks fighting the good fight against these monsters.

All brought to you by Jake Sexton, The Most Beloved Man in America ģ.

contact: jake+at+lyingmediabastards.com

Media News

December 01, 2004

Media Mambo

The Great Indecency Hoax- last week, we wrote about how the "massive outcry" to the FCC about a racy Fox TV segment amounted to letters from 20 people. This week, we look at the newest media scandal, the infamous "naked back" commercial. On Monday Night Football, last week, ABC aired an ad for it's popular "Desperate Housewives" TV show, in which one of the actresses from the show attempted to seduce a football player by removing the towel she was wearing to bare her body to him. All the audience saw, however, was her back. No tits, no ass, no crotch, just her back.

No one complained.

The next Wednesday, Rush Limbaugh told his shocked viewers how the woman had appeard in the commercial "buck naked".

Then, the FCC received 50,000 complaints. How many of them actually saw this commercial is anyone's guess.

The article also shows the amazing statistics that although the Right is pretending that the "22% of Americans voted based on 'moral values'" statistic shows the return of the Moral Majority, this is actually a huge drop from the 35% who said that in the 2000 election or the 40% who said that in 1996 (when alleged pervert Bill Clinton was re-elected). This fact is so important I'm going to mention it over in the main news section too.

Brian Williams may surprise America- Tom Brokaw's replacement anchor, Brian Williams, dismissed the impact of blogs by saying that bloggers are "on an equal footing with someone in a bathroom with a modem." Which is really funny, coming out of the mouth of a dude who's idea of journalism is to read words out loud off a teleprompter. Seriously, if parrots were literate, Brian Williams would be reporting live from the line outside the soup kitchen.

In related news, Tom Brokaw has quit NBC Nightly News, and it appears that unlike his predecessor, the new guy can speak without slurring words like a drunk.

PR Meets Psy-Ops in War on Terror- in February of 2002, Donald Rumsfeld announced the creation of the Office of Strategic Influence, a new department that would fight the war on terror through misinformation, especially by lying to journalists. Journalists were so up in arms about this that the Pentagon agreed to scrap the program.

Don't you think that an agency designed to lie to the public might lie about being shut down, too?

This article gives some examples about the US military lying to the press for propaganda and disinformation purposes.

Tavis Smiley leaving NPR in December- African-American talk show host Tavis Smiley is opting to not renew his daily talk show on National Public Radio. He criticized his former employers for failing to: "meaningfully reach out to a broad spectrum of Americans who would benefit from public radio but simply donít know it exists or what it offers ... In the most multicultural, multi-ethnic and multiracial America ever, I believe that NPR can and must do better in the future." He's 100% correct. NPR is white. Polar bear eating a marshmallow at the mayonaise factory white. And the reason it's so white is that it is trying to maintain an affluent listener base (premoniantly older white folks) who will donate money to their stations. This is a great paradox of American public broadcasting, that they have a mandate to express neglected viewpoints and serve marginalized communities, but those folks can't donate money in the amounts that the stations would like to see.

U.S. Muslim Cable TV Channel Aims to Build Bridges- it sounds more positive than it is "Bridges TV" seems to simultaneously be a cable channel pursuing an affluent American Muslim demographic, and a way of building understanding and tolerance among American non-Muslims who might happen to watch the channel's programming. I was hoping it would be aimed more at Muslim's worldwide, but it ain't. Still, I'd be interested in seeing how their news programs cover the issues.

Every Damned Weblog Post Ever- it's funny cuz it's true.

Wikipedia Creators Move Into News- Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, created collectively by thousands of contributors. It's one of those non-profit, decentralized, collective, public projects that show how good the internet can be. Now, the Wikipedia founders are working on a similar project to create a collaborative news portal, with original content. Honestly, it's quite similar to IndyMedia sites (which reminds me, happy 5th birthday, IndyMedia!). I'll admit, I'm a bit skeptical about the Wikinews project, though. IndyMedia sites work because they're local, focused on certain lefty issues, and they're run by activists invested in their beliefs. I'm not sure what would drive Wikinews or how it would hang together.

CBS, NBC ban church ad inviting gays- the United Church of Christ created a TV ad which touts the church's inclusion, even implying that they accept homosexuals into their congregation. Both CBS and NBC are refusing to air the ad. This is not too surprising, as many Americans are uncomfortable about homosexuality, and because TV networks are utter cowards. But CBS' explanation for the ban was odd:

"Because this commercial touches on the exclusion of gay couples...and the fact that the executive branch has recently proposed a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, this spot is unacceptable for broadcast."

Whoa, what? First of all, the ad does not mention marriage at all. Second, since when do positions opposite of the Executive Branch constitute "unacceptable"? This doesn't sound like "we're not airing this because it's controversial", this sounds like "we're afraid of what the President might say."

Posted by Jake at 10:09 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
More Media News

Jake Jake Jake


Fake "Ha-Ha" News




"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of what he was never reasoned into."

-Jonathan Swift

More Quotes

Media News


Obligatory Blog Links



Damn. That joke would have been much funnier if I'd said "apprentice" instead of "intern".

More Snapshots

Columnists Of Note



Sonic Resistance


Dead Trees


Heavy Rotation



Squiggles of Insight



Design and Layout by Mark McLaughlin and Quang Tang
LMB Logo by Quang Tang

Alt "One Hell of a Leader" logo largely stolen from Obey Giant.
All other material by Jake Sexton (unless otherwise cited)

hosted by nice dream