I started writing this almost a week ago, then had to travel out of the country, and here I am, back, five days later and it is as fresh as ever.
Across the spectrum of the right wing echo chamber, they are taking a new approach to dealing with the people who are the most effective at getting out the truth. They call them crazy, inappropriate, unethical, out of control.
Today, Matt Drudge, famed for the breaking the Monica Lewinsky story, and currently, the frequent point person for new right wing messages and talking points, reports a breaking story. Usually he links to other, legitimate news sites. But today, he throws this breaking news up on his site. It's a brutal attack on CNN reporter, Michael Ware, who has disputed John McCain and mocked his claims about the safety to walk the streets of Baghdad.
During a live press conference in Bagdad, Senators McCain and Graham were heckled by CNN reporter Michael Ware. An official at the press conference called Ware’s conduct “outrageous,” saying, “here you have two United States Senators in Bagdad giving first-hand reports while Ware is laughing and mocking their comments. I’ve never witnessed such disrespect. This guy is an activist not a reporter.”
Senators McCain and Graham flew into Iraq and drove into Bagdad, making stops at an open market and a joint Iraq/American military security outpost before appearing at the press conference.
This is not the first time Michael Ware has taken issue with Senator McCain’s comments about early progress in Iraq. Last week, after Senator McCain told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that he needed to catch up on the news coming out of Iraq, Michael Ware responded, saying:
“I don't know what part of Neverland Senator McCain is talking about when he says we can go strolling in Baghdad.”
Michael Ware has also publicly expressed his views on the war last year in an interview with Bill Maher, saying, “I've been given a front-row ticket to watch this slow-motion train wreck … I try to stay as drunk for as long as possible while I'm here … In fact, I'm drinking now.”
This report almost reeks of a call for firing or disciplining, or, at least, a slap on the wrist from CNN management.
And it is not alone. Joe Scarborough takes pot shots at Barbara Walters for allowing Rosie to have a voice. He asks, "How sad has Barbara Walters become. Why has she allowed Rosie O'Donnell to destroy her once great reputation?"
Scarborough asks two right wing hacks,Matthew Felling, media director for the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) and Steve Adubato.
Now, sourcewatch says this about CMPA:
On its website, CMPA claims to be politically neutral: "The Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) is a nonpartisan research and educational organization which conducts scientific studies of the news and entertainment media. CMPA election studies have played a major role in the ongoing debate over improving the election process." [1]
However, as shown below, CMPA's claim to be non-partisan is incompatible with the fact that nearly all its funding comes from conservative foundations.
CMPA also runs the Statistical Assessment Service as a front organization.
There's lots more at the sourcewatch link documenting the right wing provenance of Felling's org. There's nothing non-partisan about it.
Adubato does a talk show for the comcast cable- the default channel I turn off as fast as I can when I turn on my cable service. He's a hack talk show moderator doing a hack talk show, playing a hack media expert.
But frankly, Steve Watson of infowars has said it so well;
In a vicious and vitriolic hit piece, Scarborough enlisted two of his core simpering yes men to attack Walters for "defending Rosie's radical rants" when Walters has merely stated several times on The View that Rosie O'Donnell is entitled to her opinion.
The segment, cheaply entitled "The sad demise of Barbara Walters" once again betrayed the fact that on the subject of 9/11 the establishment media, and the baseless debunkers, will not and cannot challenge the facts and choose every time to resort to child like name calling and character assassination.
1 | 2
