If there was ever a story that more clearly validated MMFA and the importance of the work it does, I don't know what it would be.

Keep on keepin' on, MMFA.

And just tonight I heard MMFA villified by Mr. Bill O'Reilly, in a nasty, red-faced tirade, as a smear group. I guess he's not a fan...

I believe BilldO referred to MMFA as one of the "left wing news machines" that fabricates stories.

Damn that video and audio of the media! Damn you, accurate unedited transcripts ! Sorcery and alchemy !

About 50 minutes into the show, with Bernard Goldberg and a woman whose name I forget, Billo went into a tirade and referred to MMFA as a smear group...and concluded by saying he needed a drink. I disagree...Billo needs serious medication, perhaps with a vodka chaser.

Actually, it's worth the effort to get the transcript because Billo's tirade was actually directed at NBC. My wife and I were killing ourselves laughing at the fool.

IRONY.....

If you and your wife want to have a continual laugh at BillO's expense.... you need only go to:

www.sweetjesusihatebilloreilly.com

LOL. Thanks...I love it. I have a sister-in-law who idolizes O'Reilly. I'd send it to her but she wouldn't see anything wrong with Billo's episodes of lunacy.

IRONY,

"I have a sister-in-law who idolizes O'Reilly."

There is an audio clip that Stephaine Miller will sometimes run on her show (some newswoman that leans over and throws up in her mouth a little bit, live on the air no less) when something is precieved to be a nasty thought........ this is one of those times!

CAPT FOSTER:

THANK YOU, THANK YOU AND THANK YOU. I just went to the site you so graciously provided. Wonderful. I am going to pass it on to all my friends.

Billo needs serious medication, perhaps with a vodka chaser.

O'Reilly should call his friend Rush and see if he can spare any OxyContin......

Nah, Rush and Billo each considers himself too big to associate with a competitor. But can you imagine how funny it would be to get them both crap-faced loaded together, alone in the same room. It would have to be an enormous room to accomodate their egos.  ;>)

If Sean Hannity, Lush Bimbo and Bill O'Lielly ever were in the same room, they'd suck out all the air and everyone else would need supplemental oxygen and lots of air freshener.

Bill O'Lielly hates Media Matters, and F.A.I.R., and other liberal/progressive media watchdogs, because they bust him big time for his repeated lies and dissemblies and hate.

These days, however, Media Matters is #2 on Bill-O's hate list.  #1 on Bill O'Lielly's hate list is You Tube.

"while Jessica Yellin cited corporate pressure "to make sure that this was a war that was presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president's high approval ratings."

I suppose we could give every single person within the media the benefit of the doubt for perhaps the first few months of the war.......

But to all those that up until McClellen's book going public a few days ago that was still defending Bush and his war criminal(s) gang.... you are all just as guilty as those that engaged in the illegal invasion from the start!

If there is justice in the world.... they would all go to jail for a period of time for their part in this mass murder of tens of thousands of Iraqi's and 4000 soldiers that might otherwise be alive today!

One of his previous descriptions of the site was,"The most vicious website on the planet." He don't get out much.

Nothing sears the egotist more than VALID criticism. It is the unkindest cut of all.

The media was not hard enough on Bush after the inspectors went back into Iraq and found no WMD's. That was their fatal omission. They didn't do their jobs.

Does this mean we can finally kill the "liberal media" myth? How about undoing some of that media deregulation?

HEY LOOK OUT THERE IS ANOTHER TRINTY CHURCH STORY!!! LET SEE HOW LONG THE RIGHT-WING MEDIA WILL BE ON THIS STORY. THEY DID MCAIN PASTOR STORY FOR ONLY 2 DAYS. DAY2!!!! I WILL BE DOING MY COUNTDOWN.

the media is really going after mcclellan.  why didn't he speak up earlier, but that doesn't mean what he says is false.  now tony blair is on the today show trying to spin the situation.  i guess he forgot about the downing street memo, in which the head of british intelligence went to washington and came back and said the decision to invade had been made, and the "facts were being fixed around the policy".  there is lots of evidence that what mcclellan says is true.

What Scott McClellan says in his book (as reported) really isn't earth shatteringly new. I see it more as confirmation of what has leaked out of the White House and what has been said by other defectors for years. This is the first time, however, that someone this close to Bush has come clean. And, have you heard any specific denials from the White House?

I agree Irony!  I think the most telling thing is that I haven't heard any "specific" points from the book discounted?  It basically reaffirms what has already oozed out from different sources about this administration.  What i do find telling is Johm McCains comment that all govt. agencies and foreign intelligence believed we needed to go to war.  It follows a pattern by McCain to make these blanket statments that are not even close to the truth!  Some experience!

Brought to you by the party that believes in personal responsibility.  Except of course, when it means actually TAKING personal responsibility.

For how long was McClellan the ever-faithful lap dog of every neocon’s numb nuts supreme, that nudnik-decider-in-the-beltway, before he was taken out, led behind the barn then publicly humiliated while being inhumanely fired? And yes, his publication should invoke a veritable feeding-frenzy amongst the current slew of babblingly-inept, would-be reporters, chatting along remotely with those bobble-heading botox-brained anchor bimbos seated next to, poorly-coifed & arrogantly brain-dead, their eunuch counterparts! And they all shall indulge in some sort of ghoulishly-feigned feeding frenzy, pathetically mimicking the Amazon’s tasty terror, Serrasalmus natteri, the red-bellied piranha. Truly, both types are gorging juggernaughts en masse. Yet at the slightest distraction, perhaps a desultory intervention or a nuanced intercession, they individually & hurriedly flee, fly or run away to hide. Then they turn to show themselves—but from a safe distance— and scowl, menacingly myopic, in the viewer’s general direction. Of course they are once again, en masse. ¶And it is in deed interesting as to how long it took before Mr. McClellan’s zombification sloughed-off enough for him relate the horrific particulars, by which America had been plagued with for far too long. Pray the antidote will not be excruciatingly painfully for too many of later generations. And those, which now go without, shall not be put aside or still forgotten, yet lovingly cared for and righted once again, as our country will be…soon.

Damn, you talk purty...!  ;>)

In Feb. of 2006, I sat one-on-one with former CNN news anchor Aaron Brown and asked specifically why the media was ignoring its vital role in delivering the truth about the propagandized war in Iraq to the American public. We spoke of specific events leading up to the 2003 invasion. Brown responded that "everybody already knows" this stuff. He said that what we were discussing had already been reported.

Brown's dismissive and apathetic attitude toward this monumental travesty is one of the integral pieces of the puzzle that I wrote about in my book, "The WHOLE Truth about the U.S. War on Terror: Answers to every question you never knew to ask."

My book will never receive the type of coverage of a former White House Secretary, even though I provide FAR more information (all documented) and relevant. I give the inside scoop that ties in the overthrow of Iran in 1953 witht he subsequent invasion of Iran by Iraq (with U.S. assistance) in 1980 with the reasons and motivation behind the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 1990 and finally the subsequent second ground invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Until the media tells this awful story of U.S. aggression and abuse of the American military on behaf of oil companies (BP and others), this story will forever be continued as a scandal that targets Bush.

The reality is that the Democratic leadership is CURRENTLY involved in a coverup of monumental proportions. Bush isn't being protected by Republicans. He is protected by Democrats! Can I prove it? You bet I can.

100% documented.

Forget Scott McClellan's minor revelation. It is a platry premise upon which to presume the Bush administration is guilty of anything. But it does substantiate what I have been saying since 2002. And why won't anyone listen? I don't know. We'll see if Media Matters will listen.

Notice: NO MEDIA INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN MADE NOR WILL BE MADE INTO THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION OR CONGRESS REGARDING THIS MASSIVE ABUSE OF OUR MILITARY.

That's my prediction. It has remained true for at least five years now. 

Details on the abuses of this administration will be coming to light 50 years from now. There are so many unseen elephants in the room thy're starting to create visual interferrence paterns. Who needs drugs with a light show like this going on? 

AMIKEGREEN I want to read your book.  You soooo right the Democratic leadership is helping to protect Bush.  Well put my friend, can i find your book on-line?

Yo yo... yo yo...

 

While Turd Blossom was a rappin', David stood there a clappin'

And now that Scott's started yappin', David sez: "Hey! Nothin' happened!"

 

Too true David, nothin' happened.  Then, as now, you just don't get it.

 

 

Greg in a bubble

"Don't bleme me for the rubble!"

Needs long-view... from the Hubble

To see real news is in trouble?

Front page FoxNews.com:

nothing.

Nothing about McClellan

Nothing about the war. (except the coins scandal)

CNN:

At least has a promo about McClellan on the Situation Room.

MSNBC: 

nothing. 

They're still at it folks, this very serious "corporate media."

 

DB,

Of course Fox News is doing all it can to discredit McClellan, CNN has him on Anderson Cooper's show tonight, and MSNBC devoted much of their prime time to him last night, so I am not sure what your complaint with that network is?

Perhaps Eden has a minor (and I do mean minor) point about the lack of front-page internet coverage, but as far as television, yeah, it's been pretty big news.

The Fox News crew?  Heck yeah, this is very personal to them.  I have yet to hear any of them addressing the substance of McClellan's claims.  No one on the right, it seems, is making a valiant effort to refute his accounts of what happened.  Granted, the book isn't widely circulated yet, but they're not letting that stop them from getting their licks in and condemning him as a opportunistic backstabber. 

Has the left wing found its flagship Dick Morris?  Are numerous Countdown appearances in McClellan's future? 

Good points.  The battle lines are being drawn on this book already, even before it's release.

I am sure the WH is sending out their talking points which Fox is more than happy to wash, rinse and repeat, no surprise.

And MSNBC is gleefully booking him on as many shows as they can, their new best friend.

Who really knows what the actual truth regarding this book is?, my guess would be it lies somewhere between those on the right calling him an opportunistic money whore, and those on the left shining his shoes for public appearances......the blurry and vague center of it all.

Umbrella talking point - smear McClellan and avoid those pesky facts.

DB,

I have to back Tommy on this one......

Olbermann devoted his 5th, 4th, 3rd, and 2nd story to interviewing McClellan last night.  A very good interview.... it brought back memories of the days of real interviews where political hackery wasn't involved!

He was also on the Today Show (NBC)...... McClellan I think will be the guest on either Hardball or Abrams show tonight.... I forget which?

I think Fox News is puzzled by this whole affair.

This isn't the Scotty they thought they knew.

Yeah sorry Tommy, I was speaking of strict internet coverage, I should have been more clear.

Understood.

I also think it's absolutely hilarious that people are still trusting in Fox News for information.  I've seen many comments on various sites that begin with "Well McClellan's publisher also publishes Soros' books" which was the talking point pushed by O'Reilly.

Glenn Greenwald has an excellent piece about how the media frames the debate with right-wing talking points.  He's talking about Politico specifically, but I think it speaks volumes about most of the media and the way the right has hijacked it for nefarious gain.

You guys have to tell me specifically Tommy what points of the book are in question?  What have you heard or read that causes you to question "where the truth lies"?  I'll be waiting?

Because those that are touting him and those that are trashing him are falling stricty along partisan party lines at this point, that is why.   No brainer.

If that is not enough for you, keep waiting. 

Are we talking about the content of the book or McClelland as a person? It seems that the "bashers" are presenting mainly ad hominem attacks and ignoring what he actually said.

And those that are cozying up to him now hardly were his fans before he wrote this book. Yes, it's all very neat and tidy.

But "those who cozying up to him now" are doing so because of the contents of the book, not because they think he's a nice guy. Again, it seems the bashers are primarily making personal attacks, the "cozyers" are responding to the content of the book. I think there's a qualitative difference between the two.

Suffice it to say that if McClellan has a written a book defending the Bush administration, he wouldn't be cozied up to by the left in any fashion.

The difference, Tommy, is that if he wrote that book of fiction, it would be just that - FICTION.  His new book only confirms what we've already known or suspected.  It's not a matter of "cozying" up to him.  I never really hated McClellan - you could tell at his press briefings that he was performing some kind of high-wire act - he had to please his bosses but couldn't come clean with the truth (or as much truth as he was allowed to know).

Tommy's words:

"Suffice it to say that if McClellan has a written a book defending the Bush administration, he wouldn't be cozied up to by the left in any fashion."

FYI, Tommy, Buzzflash http://www.buzzflash.com named McClellan their "Hypocrite of the week" for not speaking up about Bush's lies and his lie-based war EARLIER.

 

FYI #2 for you, Tommy.

David Gregory and Brian Williams are both being the "good" indignant lapdog Republicans by attacking Scott McClellan for saying that they were too soft on him and the administration.

GOP-CNN's Republican Ed Henry is doing the same, as he is attacking McClellan, too.

The corporate conservative Republican media hacks/lapdogs don't like being called out for rolling over to Liar Bush and THE BUSH CABAL.

Yea, that might be right Tommy, but the truth is objective!  Were there WMD found?  Were there ties to 9/11?  Were we mislead?  The no-brainer is how you could still have questions!

The question I asked Tommy had to do with what questions you still had?  You arrogant snob!

Well if you had left off your snarky "I'll be waiting", you wouldn't have gotten my response in kind.

The media's lapdog/partisan Republipunk treatment/favoritism towards Bush didn't just take place throughout his administration, it actualyl started in July of 1999, maybe even before that time, before Bush even announced his intention to run for president.

The corporate conservative Republican Party controlled news media showed MONUMENTAL favoritism to Bush in 1999, throughout the 2000 presidential election, and throughout his administration, and that pro-GOP favoritism trickled down to benefit other lying right wing Republicans.

The Daily Howler http://www.thedailyhowler.com has pieces in their archives about how the media showed then, and still shows now, favoritism to Bush and/or favoritism to the Republicans.

Jessica Yellin's telling words:

"YELLIN: I wouldn't go that far. I think the press corps dropped the ball at the beginning. When the lead-up to war began, the press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war that was presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president's high approval ratings.

And my own experience at the White House was that, the higher the president's approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives -- and I was not at this network at the time -- but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president. I think, over time, as President Bush's --"

Yellin's admission should, in my opinion, warrant calls for the impeachment of the news media.  That's right.  I said...IMPEACH THE CORPORATE CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN NEWS MEDIA! 

The first ground for impeachment: Active collusion with Bush and/or the Bush administration and/or the Republican Party.

Scott McClellan confirmed what Eric Boehlert wrote in his book Lapdogs, at least 3 years earlier.

I'm crediting Boehlert a little more than McClellan here, even though both are right.