(An email to MSNBC)
If I assume that your political reporting and commentary is honest and unbiased, then I must conclude that your so-called journalists are remarkably ignorant. I just tuned in for a few minutes and caught your coverage of Bill Clinton's latest dishonest propagandizing. The remarkable (though predictable) thing is that, apparently, none of your people knew that he delivered four or five big lies in a matter of a couple of minutes. Don't you have a journalist or commentator with enough political knowledge and savvy to interview someone as slick as Bill Clinton? Why is it that Republicans always get the hard questions from you guys and when you interview Democrats it’s like you’re reading a script written by the Democratic National Committee or MoveOn.org? In this particular Clinton interview, you repeatedly commented on his lies as though what he had said was true. This of course led ignorant viewers to believe his lies. And you do this sort of thing every day!
Let me help you out a little: Among other things, he said that his administration had created a program that had cut poverty significantly and that the Bush administration got rid of the program. Can you tell me just exactly what program that might be? I defy you to do so because there is no such program. You see, it's simple: Bill Clinton made the whole thing up. He lied. Of course that should surprise no one because he has always had a really big problem with the truth, but that's another story. My question to you all is why you don't know that he lied? It is your job to know these things. Isn't it?
But that's not all: If you revisit his words and do your homework, you will find that he lied a number of times while accusing President Bush of doing things he has not done. You should not only know this, you should report it vigorously. Don't you agree that it is big news when a former president of the United States blatantly lies about important national issues and, additionally, falsely accuses a sitting president of committing reprehensible acts? Are these not things that we the people should know about? Bill Clinton’s remarks were part of the anti-Bush propaganda that has been ongoing for years.
The difference, and what is news, is that the lies and the false accusations leveled against a sitting president, did not come from the likes of Howard Dean, of whom, sadly, we now expect such things. It came from a former president who, like Jimmy Carter, has breached an unwritten, though formerly respected rule that living former presidents do not criticize the policies of sitting presidents regarding issues of national security. Yet Mr. Clinton also used the occasion to denigrate our current president with other outright lies. He used Katrina (perhaps our worst ever natural disaster) to imply that the President does not care about the poor among us and that his (the President’s) uncaring indifference caused much suffering among those unfortunate people. All in all, Mr. Clinton’s performance was one of the most despicable displays of low-class political deceit and opportunism I have ever witnessed. And you people missed it all—apparently because you just don’t know what’s going on! Or for some other reason.
Here are some things to check out: Contrary to Mr. Clinton's claims, measured against the Clinton administration, under President Bush anti-poverty program spending has increased and poverty levels have decreased; minority home ownership is higher than ever before in our history; unemployment is lower than the average unemployment rates during the eight Clinton years (now at 4.9%); President Bush increased education spending significantly over the Clinton years, and test scores of minority children are at all-time high levels. And should I mention that President Bush has assembled the most racially/ethnically diverse administration in our country’s history?
There is much more, though my point here is that Mr. Clinton and so many others would rather lie to us than admit the truth. In fact, dishonest spin was and continues to be standard procedure for Mr. Clinton, Democrats in general, and biased, agenda-driven media outlets like MSNBC. As long as you fail to report the truth you are as guilty as the political liars you support. Furthermore, you abuse your priviledged use of public airwaves. In so doing, you weaken our country just as surely and as effectively as any enemy could.
I am right about this yet it is reprehensible that you and other media outlets remain guarded and protected from accountability. You simply don’t respond to these honest and accurate charges and questions. What could you say if you did? Would you plead ignorance? If not; then what? The only rational alternative explanation I can think of is that you know when the politicians lie to you but you fail to confront them in order to protect them. Given your record, that is the most plausible explanation. Of course you won't admit to this. In fact, you won’t answer this email. You will send me an automatic response, which will say that you appreciate my feedback but that you cannot answer my email because you get too many of them and it would be too time consuming, etc. Worse, you won’t address the issues I raise at all—either by email or on the air, which you certainly could and should do. That’s too bad, though it is a sign of our times.
My conclusion: You are not professional journalists and news reporters. You are propagandists for the Democrats, political shills, and hacks of the worst kind. Your network should, by all reasonable ethical standards, be banned from the use of public airwaves. You do these things as a matter of policy and practice. You are a disgrace to the ethical principles on which our democracy depends for its core strengths and values. Daily, you weaken our nation with your dishonest propaganda. You are enemies of democracy.
© Robert D. McKinley
All rights reserved.
If I assume that your political reporting and commentary is honest and unbiased, then I must conclude that your so-called journalists are remarkably ignorant. I just tuned in for a few minutes and caught your coverage of Bill Clinton's latest dishonest propagandizing. The remarkable (though predictable) thing is that, apparently, none of your people knew that he delivered four or five big lies in a matter of a couple of minutes. Don't you have a journalist or commentator with enough political knowledge and savvy to interview someone as slick as Bill Clinton? Why is it that Republicans always get the hard questions from you guys and when you interview Democrats it’s like you’re reading a script written by the Democratic National Committee or MoveOn.org? In this particular Clinton interview, you repeatedly commented on his lies as though what he had said was true. This of course led ignorant viewers to believe his lies. And you do this sort of thing every day!
Let me help you out a little: Among other things, he said that his administration had created a program that had cut poverty significantly and that the Bush administration got rid of the program. Can you tell me just exactly what program that might be? I defy you to do so because there is no such program. You see, it's simple: Bill Clinton made the whole thing up. He lied. Of course that should surprise no one because he has always had a really big problem with the truth, but that's another story. My question to you all is why you don't know that he lied? It is your job to know these things. Isn't it?
But that's not all: If you revisit his words and do your homework, you will find that he lied a number of times while accusing President Bush of doing things he has not done. You should not only know this, you should report it vigorously. Don't you agree that it is big news when a former president of the United States blatantly lies about important national issues and, additionally, falsely accuses a sitting president of committing reprehensible acts? Are these not things that we the people should know about? Bill Clinton’s remarks were part of the anti-Bush propaganda that has been ongoing for years.
The difference, and what is news, is that the lies and the false accusations leveled against a sitting president, did not come from the likes of Howard Dean, of whom, sadly, we now expect such things. It came from a former president who, like Jimmy Carter, has breached an unwritten, though formerly respected rule that living former presidents do not criticize the policies of sitting presidents regarding issues of national security. Yet Mr. Clinton also used the occasion to denigrate our current president with other outright lies. He used Katrina (perhaps our worst ever natural disaster) to imply that the President does not care about the poor among us and that his (the President’s) uncaring indifference caused much suffering among those unfortunate people. All in all, Mr. Clinton’s performance was one of the most despicable displays of low-class political deceit and opportunism I have ever witnessed. And you people missed it all—apparently because you just don’t know what’s going on! Or for some other reason.
Here are some things to check out: Contrary to Mr. Clinton's claims, measured against the Clinton administration, under President Bush anti-poverty program spending has increased and poverty levels have decreased; minority home ownership is higher than ever before in our history; unemployment is lower than the average unemployment rates during the eight Clinton years (now at 4.9%); President Bush increased education spending significantly over the Clinton years, and test scores of minority children are at all-time high levels. And should I mention that President Bush has assembled the most racially/ethnically diverse administration in our country’s history?
There is much more, though my point here is that Mr. Clinton and so many others would rather lie to us than admit the truth. In fact, dishonest spin was and continues to be standard procedure for Mr. Clinton, Democrats in general, and biased, agenda-driven media outlets like MSNBC. As long as you fail to report the truth you are as guilty as the political liars you support. Furthermore, you abuse your priviledged use of public airwaves. In so doing, you weaken our country just as surely and as effectively as any enemy could.
I am right about this yet it is reprehensible that you and other media outlets remain guarded and protected from accountability. You simply don’t respond to these honest and accurate charges and questions. What could you say if you did? Would you plead ignorance? If not; then what? The only rational alternative explanation I can think of is that you know when the politicians lie to you but you fail to confront them in order to protect them. Given your record, that is the most plausible explanation. Of course you won't admit to this. In fact, you won’t answer this email. You will send me an automatic response, which will say that you appreciate my feedback but that you cannot answer my email because you get too many of them and it would be too time consuming, etc. Worse, you won’t address the issues I raise at all—either by email or on the air, which you certainly could and should do. That’s too bad, though it is a sign of our times.
My conclusion: You are not professional journalists and news reporters. You are propagandists for the Democrats, political shills, and hacks of the worst kind. Your network should, by all reasonable ethical standards, be banned from the use of public airwaves. You do these things as a matter of policy and practice. You are a disgrace to the ethical principles on which our democracy depends for its core strengths and values. Daily, you weaken our nation with your dishonest propaganda. You are enemies of democracy.
© Robert D. McKinley
All rights reserved.
