Who the hell is Eason Jordan?
According to his CNN bio, “he is executive vice president and chief news executive of CNN. He chairs the CNN Editorial Board, is a member of the CNN Executive Committee and provides strategic advice to CNN’s senior management team.”
Ok, he is the top dog at CNN. Got it.
What’s the big deal?
At the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland, the head of CNN “asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by U.S. troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience (the anti-US crowd) and cause great strain on others.”
Who was strained?
David Gergan, Democrat Senator Chris Dodd and uber liberal Mass. Congressman Barney Frank. Michelle Malkin was there when they were Crossing Jordan.
This isn’t the first time Eason Jordan has smeared the military. Hugh Hewitt, in perhaps the best titled blog post ever, points us to this,
“The Most Busted Name In News“
“Actions speak louder than words. The reality is that at least 10 journalists
have been killed by the US military, and according to reports I believe to be
true journalists have been arrested and tortured by US forces,” Mr Jordan told
an audience of news executives at the News Xchange conference in Portugal.” November 29, 2004, The Guardian, London
Why haven’t I heard about this?
It takes time for bloggers to make enough noise and break enough stories before the MSM feels compelled to put one of their own on full display for the whole country to see their bias and prejudice.
Larry Kudlow: Eason Jordan vs. the Blogosphere
The blogosphere is relentless: It rightfully hammered Eason Jordan and CNN
from day one and refuses to stop. Weâ??ve seen this before, of course. Easongate
comes only a few months after Rathergate, the blogosphere-led campaign that
ensured the dismissal of producer Mary Mapes from CBS and Dan Ratherâ??s hasty
departure. The blogosphere has gained near immediate influence and
credibility with its ability to widely disseminate alternative media coverage.
(These days, â??alternativeâ? more often than not means â??true.â?Â)
Also, don’t miss Mickey Kaus’ treatment of Wash Post/CNN media critic Howard Kurtz,
Kurtz Stays Silent in Eason Jordan Controversy! Day 7.
…Seriously, isn’t this something you’d expect WaPo’s media reporter to cover,
one way or another? … Update: Apparently the videotape of Jordan’s remarks is available. No doubt Kurtz will vigorously pursue the tape, which doesn’t look very hard to get. (Who would want to suppress the truth?) Then he can “cablecast” the video on his show, “Reliable Sources,” on CNN
How big was the blogsphere reaction?
NZ Bear, creator of the blogsphere ecosystem, has the most complete round-up. NZ Bear was a guest on Pundit Review Radio, check it out here.
What makes this so offensive?
Once again, Larry Kudlow,
Besides the obvious anti-military bias, Jordanâ??s comments were incredibly
arrogant and cynical. And, yes, I believe his remarks border on wartime treason,
since they so clearly give aid and comfort to our terrorist enemies as well as
anti-American Arab militants throughout the Middle East. Remember, this is the
same Eason Jordan of CNN who made a deal with Saddam Hussein and his regime to not report atrocities in Iraq in exchange for keeping a CNN news base in
Baghdad.
What’s this about CNN’s Baghdad bureau?
CNN boss Eason Jordon confessed that for some 12 years he covered up the fact that Saddam Hussein was a murderous “maniac” whose goons regularly tortured not only Iraqi citizens but even his own Baghdad bureau CNN employees.
Jordonâ??s excuse for keeping this kind of thing from the public CNN is supposed to inform â?? he might lose his Baghdad bureau, or his employees and informants could be killed. He doesnâ??t tell us why he just didnâ??t close down the Baghdad bureau and get his people out of there. And then tell the world the truth about the Iraqi regime.
CNN only covered up for that one dictator, right?
Wrong,
CNNâ??s Havana bureau now has a five-year track record that can be evaluated,
and the results are not good. Media Research Center analysts reviewed all 212
stories about the Cuban government or Cuban life that were presented on CNNâ??s
prime time news programs from March 17, 1997, the date the Havana bureau was
established, through March 17, 2002. MRCâ??s analysis found that instead of
exposing the totalitarian regime that runs Cuba, CNN has allowed itself to
become just another component of Fidel Castroâ??s propaganda machine.
Can you think of a worse choice to head the DNC than Howard Dean? Al Sharpton, maybe? What are they thinking? Weak on foeign policy, losing values voters, suburban voters, sure Howard Dean is just the guy to bring these constituencies back into the fold. Sure he is. There are only two positives that I see for Dems. First is that Dean takes attention away from the dreadful combo of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. He also makes Hillary look good (and centrist) by comparison. That makes me nervous.
Ailing Democrats Put Their Faith in Dr. Dean
By Dan Balz, Washington Post Staff Writer
Two questions swirled around the Democrats as their
national committee assembled yesterday to select a new party chairman: Can he cure what ails the party, or is Howard Dean symptomatic of why those ailments may be so difficult to cure?The former Vermont governor is poised to claim the party
chairmanship tomorrow. His victory represents a personal triumph one year after his presidential campaign was in ashes and symbolizes the strength of the party’s revitalized grass roots in the aftermath of John F. Kerry’s loss to President Bush in November.But for a party grappling with the question of how it can become more
competitive in the red states of the South, Midwest and Mountain West, the decision to elect as its chairman a confrontational New Englander with a liberal identity and a penchant for making controversial statements sends a message in the view of some Democrats that little has been learned from the losses in 2004.
Learned little? It sure seems like they’ve learned a lot less than a little. Try absolutely nothing. The Democrat Party is a bunch of masochists at this point. Thank you sir, may I have another electoral beating! YES YOU CAN.
UPDATE: Bill Moyes beats the odds
UPDATE: Bill O’Reilly just did a segment on this story. When he teased it earlier in the program I wondered if he would acknowledge the role of blogs. Well, the segment guest was Scott Johnson of Powerline. It was a good exchange.
O’Reilly is like Terrerll Owens, he a difficult guy to root for. The sex harassment suit by a former producer last year was a total embarrassment. He was busted and it cost him more than money. Still, he is pretty fair if you watch him. Certainly fair by today’s standards.
O’Reilly,
“your an interesting group…your keeping an eye on these people”
(referring to the MN Star Tribune)“I’m glad your out there” (referring to Powerline)
The interview closed with O’Reilly’s usual rant about “the web
sites” that smear people including him “every day”. Scott
defended Powerline and O’Reilly admitted he was referring to the “other
ones”.
John Hinderacker at Powerline disembowels PBS poster boy and pompous blowhard Bill Moyers. He busts Moyers for his outrageous rhetoric, his lies, his lack of understanding and contempt for people of faith. He does so with Moyers own words. A delicious peice of work for those who find Moyers uniquly disgusting.
James Watt has written to Bill Moyers, asking him to apologize for the lies
in his Star Tribune article. After quoting Moyers’ statements about him, Watt
wrote:I have never thought, believed or said such words. Nor have I ever said
anything similar to that thought which could be interpreted by a reasonable
person to mean anything similar to the quote attributed to me.Because you are at least average in intelligence and have a basic
understanding of Christian beliefs, you know that no Christian would believe
what you attributed to me.
Because you have had the privilege of serving in
the White House under President Johnson, you know that no person believing such
a thing would be qualified for a Presidential appointment, nor would he be
confirmed by the United States Senate, and if confirmed and said such a thing
would he be allowed to continue in service.Since you must have known such a statement would not have been made and
you refused or failed to do any primary research on this supposed quote, what
was your motive in printing such a damnable lie?Before the advent of the blogosphere, Bill Moyers–arrogant, rich,
powerful and well-connected–would merely have thrown Mr. Watt’s letter into the
trash. Today, he may still do so. But he and his friends in the liberal media no
longer have a monopoly on information, and those who have been defamed by them,
like James Watt, now have the means to make their voices heard.
At the height of the Dan Rather controversy, on October 2nd, 2004, Pundit Review Radio interviewed Scott Johnson of Powerline. We had a wide ranging discussion about the phony document controversy and the impact it was having on the mainstream media.
Noemie Emery in The Weekly Standard
The Dems’ Week from Hell From the February 14 / February 21, 2005 issue:
They’re in a hole, and they keep digging
EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN WRONG with the Democrats in the past several years was on vivid display during Hell Week: the teeth-grinding shrillness; the race card, misplayed with such gusto; the self-interest so blatant it defeats its own purpose; the crippling dearth of ideas. With a few brave exceptions (a faction of one named Joe Lieberman), the Democrats split into two major camps: the wingnuts–Dean, Boxer, and Kennedy–who know what they think, which alas sets them at odds with the rest of the country; and the caucus of cowards–Bayh, Edwards, and Kerry–who believe in nothing so much as their own career prospects, and change their minds on the gravest of war and peace issues on the basis of what serves their ends.
Tax cuts are for the rich. We all know that, right? Every tax cut for the past twenty years has been for the rich at the expense of the poor. The liberal world view is that they care about the poor and are out to protect them from the cold, greedy Republicans. Tax cuts have to be bad because the alternative means that the liberal world view is not only wrong, but damaging to their main constituency.
What if people figure it out?
Bush’s Tax Cuts Are Unfair …To the rich.
By Steven E. Landsburg
Overall, the biggest percentage cuts went to the poorest of the poor (those
with incomes in the $10,000 range) and the next biggest to those making
about $60,000. After that, with some minor dips up and down, the relative
size of your tax cut falls off as your income rises.That’s if you pay taxes only on ordinary income. But what about capital
gains, dividends, and inheritanceâ??the cuts that supposedly skew the gains in
favor of the rich? Well, let’s throw all those changes in, and while we’re at it
let’s include changes in the child-care tax credit, the earned income tax
credit, the alternative minimum tax, and payroll taxes for Social Security and
Medicare.Here’s what we get. The biggest percentage tax cutâ??about 17.6 percentâ??went to taxpayers in the second-lowest quintile, that is to taxpayers with below-average incomes. After that, the size of the tax cut falls off as you move from the lower middle to the middle middle (12.6 percent) to the upper middle class (9.9 percent). It rises again slightly for the top quintile, but only to a little over 11 percent.
I don’t understand the screaming headline on Drudge today? Good for the Bush
administration to speak the truth about the tax cut. What’s the scandal?
BUSH BUDGET DIRECTOR BRAGS OF SHIFTING TAX BURDEN TO RICH
The White House budget director Josh Bolten on Monday bragged to reporters how
the nation most-wealthy will see an increase in tax burden under Bush’s new
budget.”If you look at the president’s tax cuts as a totality, the income tax,
those at the upper end of the spectrum are now paying a larger share of the
income tax than they were before,” Bolten explained. “An example, the top 5
percent in income in this country — that’s people making above about $140,000
— without the president’s tax cuts that top 5 percent would be paying about
less than 52 percent of our total income tax revenue. “After the president’s tax
cut that group is paying more than 54 percent of our total tax revenue. So the
notion that the president’s tax cuts have somehow made the code less progressive
is wrong. The president’s tax cuts have made the tax code more progressive.”
We will be hearing lots from President Bush tonight about reforming social security. Its too bad he won’t mention Clinton’s 1998 SOTU speech in which his tag line was “Save Social Security First. It was an emergency then, today, it is only a scare tactic.
Anyway, if you want to hear from two leading proponents of social security reform, check out these interviews from Pundit Review Radio,
The first is with Don Luskin, political economist and writer for Smart Money, National Review and the blog PoorandStupid. Listen to what he has to say about the unfairness of the current system to poor and minorities and the coming numbers crunch that the Dems want you to believe doesn’t excist.
Don Luskin on Pundit Review Radio
The second interview is with Mr. Charles Jarvis, Chairman and Chief Executive of USA Next and United Seniors Association (USA).
Mr. Jarvis’ political career includes stints as a senior executive in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, including Deputy Undersecretary of the Interior. He also served as Legislative Director for U.S. Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
His organization, United Seniors Association, is a 1.5 million-plus national network of grassroots activists dedicated to Uniting the Generations for Americaâ??s FutureTM. USA works intensively to expand Economic Freedom, Health Freedom and Retirement and Investment Freedom for all Americans at every age and every stage in life.
Charles Jarvis on Pundit Review Radio
Happy 1st birthday to Bill over at INDC Journal. Bill runs one of our favorite blogs and has had an incredible first year.
INDC Journal played an instrumental role in Rathergate and may be best known for doing Mary Mapes job for her. In the earliest moments of Rathergate, INDC Journal was doing original, insightful research, dialing for dollars and interviewing document experts, advancing the story. INDC Journal’s work was a big part of the blogsphere debunking the documents and castrating CBS News.
During the height of Rathergate, we interviewed Bill on Pundit Review Radio, you can listen to it here.
We can’t wait to see what year two has in store!