Being posed the question of should Chris Matthews moderate the upcoming Republican debate after having stated his opinions on the "Criminality" of the Bush Administration, Pulitzer Prize Winner Carl Bernstein manages to deftly bob weave and jab with the Fox & Friends staff, making them look like the dim-partisan-bulbs that they are.
Bernstein: I think it's very important that journalist put in the front people who are readers and viewers whether or not there are questions of criminality, of unconstitutionality about this President. Certainly the question of lying, mendacity - of the Secretary of State, of the President of the United States, of the Vice-President - these are questions that given the lack of congressional oversight and the lack of answers - this is news. And we ought to be raising the questions (and the former Attorney General). Have their been criminal acts? Let's look at the particular examples and perhaps - now, criminality is to be judged by the courts not by reports.
Fox Guy: That's the problem he seems to be answering his own question. He's not just raising the question of criminality, he's saying there's criminality.
Bernstein: Exactly. I think that - again - I'd have to see some examples. But I've raised the question myself, if people go to CarlBernstein.com, they'll see I've written a couple articles myself for vanity fair.
Yeah, some specifics like the War Crimes Act via Gitmo, abu Ghraib and Haditha, Kidnapping via Renditions, the UN Conventions against Torture via the various detainee treatment memos not to mention the 8th Amendment, Domestic Spying without a Warrant in violation the FISA Act and the Fifth Amendment, politicizing the Justice department in violation of the Hatch Act, using the power of the DOJ to influence elections in violation of the Voting Rights Act, Gross Criminal Negligence for ignoring the victims of Katrina, paying for Fake News Reports, re-writing and ignoring thousands of laws on the back of a paper-napkin via "signing statments", more negligence in ignoring the U.S.S. Cole and dozens of reports warning about a domestic attack by al Qeada, then charging into Iraq without a fracking clue what they were doing, and lastly Treason for revealing the identity of an undercover CIA Operative simply to make political points.
Then of course you have various former members of the White House Staff who've all been convicted of crimes, such as David Safavian, Claude Allen and Scooter Libby.
Could Matthews have been thinking of this kind of "Criminality?"
Let's remember that when the Democrats refused to attend the Fox News debates they were accused of being cowards. "If they can't stand up to Fox News, how are they going to stand up to al Qaeda?"
Which of course tells us that Fox News is a terrorist organization.
Since then we've had the Republicans run with their Cialis powered-tails between their legs from the primarily Black Debate on PBS, the Spanish Language Debate on Univision and the Gay Issues with the Human Rights Campaign and now - Chris Matthews who not only drank the Kool-aid, he pratically pisses it, is now "too polarizing" to moderate the Republican Debates?
Oy vey!
So of course, they Foxublicans have to then resort to their "Victim" card.
Fox Guy: My question is this, do you think that the news media has taken a more serious look at this President than they have at Presidents that might be more towards their viewpoint?
Bernstein: No. I think that your perception, indicated by the question, is that the outrages and lack of truth telling is more grievous in this Presidency, in particularly in graat national and international issues, is much greater in this Presidency than any Presidency in history - perhaps including Nixon. It's just a matter of fact.
Fox Guy: It just seems to me that if an news anchor were to come out and say something like that without giving details there would be more outcry from the Press.
Bernstien: Oh, I don't think so, if the Press was ever all over a Presidency - look what it did during the Clinton Administration.
Here in part two Bernstein lays it out on with the question of whether Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity should be moderating the debate and addresses the rarely mentioned point that our internal ideological/cultural battle is taking a significant amount of energy and attention away from fighting actual terrorists.
And I wonder whose fault is that? Maybe it has something to do with that guy who calls himself a "Culture Warrior?!"
Just wondering.
The amazing thing is that they actually Shut the F-Up for two minutes and let him finish his thought and statment instead of the usual Fox tactic of peppering somebody making a decent point with swarm of questions, like anti-aircraft fire at an incoming bomber.
Rat-tat-tatt-tattt!!! "I'll get you bastards yet!!!"
This time though, not so much. But then again Fox & Friends is the face of friendly facism.
Bernstein: Going back to our culture today, I think we continue to be poliarize in an ideological cultural war. One of the reasons I'm so happy with this book about Hillary is that I've tried to take her out of the context this cultural warfare and say - "Here's who she is, look at her whether your on the left or the right, and make up your mind if you hate her why you hate her, and if you like her why you like her, but don't make it tied to this vicious gridlock that has kept this country from moving anywhere. And these debates that are so ideologically fired - we have put more energy into fighting each other in this ideological war in washington than we have to real terrorism. The candidate that gets beyond ideology is the one that's going to win the general election.
Vyan
No comments:
Post a Comment