ABCNEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR Favors Kerry over Bush

[BigBadBrian]

ABCNEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR MEMO SPARKS CONTROVERSY: BOTH SIDES NOT 'EQUALLY ACCOUNTABLE'

**Exclusive**

An internal memo written by ABCNEWS Political Director Mark Halperin admonishes ABC staff: During coverage of Democrat Kerry and Republican Bush not to "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable."

The controversial internal memo obtained by DRUDGE, captures Halperin stating how "Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win."

But Halperin claims that Bush is hoping to "win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions."

"The current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done," Halperin writes.

Halperin's claim that ABCNEWS will not "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable" set off sparks in St. Louis where media players gathered to cover the second presidential debate.

Halperin states the responsibilities of the ABCNEWS staff have "become quite grave."

In August, Halperin declared online: "This is now John Kerry's contest to lose."

x x x x x

Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004

It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave

I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.

The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.

Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.

We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.

I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.

[Lqskdiver]

"I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest.

Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right"
Piece of fucking human waste!! I demand this guys head along with Mary Maples!! They should not be in charge of news networks and messing with the minds of the impressionable, i.e. OD.

Have you heard there new slogan? "ACCURATE AND CREDIBLE"

Bull fucking shit!!

Hell, even Dean could see through these guys masqeurade!
:mad:

[Ally_Kat]

so wait -- Kerry mistakens, Bush distorts. If Kerry "mistakens" we let that slide. If Bush "distorts" we jump on it.

I really shouldn't be suprised anymore.

[FORD]

Tell you what.... you get FAUX to fire Roger Ailes, John Ellis (Junior's COUSIN, for Christ's sake), Carl Campaign Hack Cameron, and Hitler Hannity, and I'll personally call Michael Eisner and tell him he needs to talk to this guy.

Deal?

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by FORD
Tell you what.... you get FAUX to fire Roger Ailes, John Ellis (Junior's COUSIN, for Christ's sake), Carl Campaign Hack Cameron, and Hitler Hannity, and I'll personally call Michael Eisner and tell him he needs to talk to this guy.

Deal?

Once again FORD can't take the fact that there is ONE news source that isn't left wing. You guys had it your way for 35+ years and now pee pee your pants if there is a news source whose take on a story doesn't fit what you've been weened on. Get over it. Funny how tolerant leftists who are all for free speech want to shut down Fox (or install "blockers" on cable TV etc). This si always the case for them, if they don't agree with it then try to squelch it.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
Once again FORD can't take the fact that there is ONE news source that isn't left wing. You guys had it your way for 35+ years and now pee pee your pants if there is a news source whose take on a story doesn't fit what you've been weened on. Get over it. Funny how tolerant leftists who are all for free speech want to shut down Fox (or install "blockers" on cable TV etc). This si always the case for them, if they don't agree with it then try to squelch it.

Employing the pResident's relatives, his campaign staff and PNAC'ers like Kristol takes it to a level resembling that of Pravda in the old USSR. This isn't just a network with right wing bias, it's a network with close ties to the BCE itself, and that's over the line. Clear Channel is even worse. The BCE's own money founded that operation.

[Warham]

Well, FORD, that's one network to what? 10 for the Libs?

I think you guys have it slanted a little much in your favor, don't ya think?

You've been saying that the media is conservatively biased? Only in your dreamworld. The biggest media outlets are ALL liberally biased, except for FOX. And why is FOX now the most watched news network?
Because people are sick of the liberal spin on these major outlets.

[Big Train]

Ford,

I have a question. Let's put the plates down here and get down to brass tacks. Irregardless of what is happening elsewhere, do you see in the case of this one network bias?

I hear a justification from you saying it's ok, everybody does it. Is this correct?

[FORD]

Show me a network that employs Kerry's relatives, members of Kerry's campaign staff, or ....well, I can't come up with a counterpart to PNAC, because there isn't one They are a uniquely evil fascist front for the Likud party of Israel.

Point is that while this ONE GUY at ABC might have a view different than Michael Eisner's, it's still Eisner who controls the editorial content of the network. And this is the same Eisner who tried to keep Fahrenheit 9-11 from being released, so it's obvious where his bias is.

FAUX is packed from grunt reporters to the head office with BCE/PNAC/GOP operatives. If it's not state controlled media, it's the next "best" thing.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by FORD
Show me a network that employs Kerry's relatives, members of Kerry's campaign staff, or ....well, I can't come up with a counterpart to PNAC, because there isn't one They are a uniquely evil fascist front for the Likud party of Israel.

Point is that while this ONE GUY at ABC might have a view different than Michael Eisner's, it's still Eisner who controls the editorial content of the network. And this is the same Eisner who tried to keep Fahrenheit 9-11 from being released, so it's obvious where his bias is.

FAUX is packed from grunt reporters to the head office with BCE/PNAC/GOP operatives. If it's not state controlled media, it's the next "best" thing.

Absolute nonsense...

[Big Train]

Your still spinning Ford.

Forget Eisner, forget everyone, are you condoning this man's actions?

[John Ashcroft]

Originally posted by FORD
Show me a network that employs Kerry's relatives, members of Kerry's campaign staff...

Uh, don't Begala and Carville work for a certain news network? What about Chris Matthews, which administration did he work for again before he became a "credible jounalist"? In fact, there's a whole list of Dems from former administrations littering the "news" networks. There's almost no previous Republican staffers on the staff of the "news" networks.

Get your facts straight dude. That was an easy one...

[FORD]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
Uh, don't Begala and Carville work for a certain news network? What about Chris Matthews, which administration did he work for again before he became a "credible jounalist"? In fact, there's a whole list of Dems from former administrations littering the "news" networks. There's almost no previous Republican staffers on the staff of the "news" networks.

Get your facts straight dude. That was an easy one...

Key word there: FORMER admistrations. FAUX has people closely tied to the CURRENT fraudministration.

It would not have been correct for George Stephanapolous to host a Sunday morning news show while he was working for President Clinton. But he didn't. Pat Buchanan worked for both Nixon and Reagan. But he wasn't hosting the original Crossfire nor his MSRNC remake of the show at the time.

There is a MAJOR difference.

[John Ashcroft]

No there isn't. The "news" networks are littered with liberals from all over the place. It's as simple as that.

But anyway, how do you feel about Begala and Carville's joining the Kerry campaign while still working for a news organization? You see any problem with that?

[FORD]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
No there isn't. The "news" networks are littered with liberals from all over the place. It's as simple as that.

But anyway, how do you feel about Begala and Carville's joining the Kerry campaign while still working for a news organization? You see any problem with that?

I wasn't aware they had officially joined the campaign. I remember Carville's name being mentioned as an example of the type of "energy" that Kerry needed on his campaign staff, but that's the last I heard of it. But then, being known as one of Howard Dean's most vocal supporters doesn't exactly keep me "in the loop" at Kerry HQ.

[John Ashcroft]

Let me cue you in. They've both officially become advisors to the Kerry campaign.

Now how do you feel about that?

[FORD]

Originally posted by John Ashcroft
Let me cue you in. They've both officially become advisors to the Kerry campaign.

Now how do you feel about that?

What's your source? (and please tell me it's not Mush Limpdick)

IF that is the case, and they are officially employed by the campaign, then they should take a vacation from their TV job until after the election. As Buchanan rightly did as Crossfire host, when he was running for President.

[Big Train]

Ford,

Answer the fuckin question. Do yo condone this one man's acts in this particular case?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Lqskdiver
Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right"[/size]
Piece of fucking human waste!! I demand this guys head along with Mary Maples!! They should not be in charge of news networks and messing with the minds of the impressionable, i.e. OD.

Have you heard there new slogan? "ACCURATE AND CREDIBLE"

Bull fucking shit!!


Oh yeah, I get all my news and political views from ABC :rolleyes:

[John Ashcroft]

Originally posted by FORD
What's your source? (and please tell me it's not Mush Limpdick)

IF that is the case, and they are officially employed by the campaign, then they should take a vacation from their TV job until after the election. As Buchanan rightly did as Crossfire host, when he was running for President.

Okey dokey. And it's coming from the NY Times, which could hardly be considered a "Right Wing" mouthpiece...

Kerry's Cast of Thousands

Across the wine-dark sea they come, honing Kerry's message. They come from Harvard, K Street and the studios of CNN. "Once more into the breach!" they cry, as they join the conference call of thousands.

Look at them, these great, unhuddled masses, yearning to wear White House badges. They are consultants, flacks, spinners, strategists, Knights of the Palm lunch table. And yet they come as one, from all corners of the Democratic world, to figure out what John Kerry, age 60, should believe and say.

Into the valley of hope ride the 600, the inner ring of Kerry confidants. A year ago, there was just a small and hearty band. There was the campaign manager Jim Jordan. There was Gibbs, Cherny and Mellman. But under their reign, the message was not honed. The candidate did flounder. The quest for a Kerry conviction was not fulfilled.

And so the great accretion began. The call went out to pollsters, wonks and wandering wordsmiths to come gather and fill the void of Kerry's core. Brave souls emerged from the Land of Ted - the Kennedy brigades led by Cahill and Cutter are now abetting the mighty Shrum.

Boldly they rode and well, into the morass of Kerry's mind. Through the thicket of equivocations they ventured, across the paradoxical plains of Kerry's prose - all in the quest for a conviction.

Policy committees gathered. Of domestic policy councils there were 37. Of foreign policy councils, 27.

And in each of these councils resided faculties and think-tankers by the score. On the justice policy task force there were 195 members, lawyers brave and strong. On the economic council, more than 200 economists did search for a conclusion. When these groups did meet, so long was the line of approaching Volvos that it was visible from outer space.

Yet still the message was not honed. King Kerry still did equivocate, hedge and reverse. Of flip-flops there were more than a few. He still did Velcro his principles upon the cathedral door, and change them by the hour.

The apparatus grew again. Elmendorf from the Land of Gephardt was hired, along with Lackey from the House of Edwards. Teams of de-equivocators gathered. And still the fog spread.

And so the age of nymphomottomania did begin. Suddenly it was realized what was missing. A theme! A slogan! The muses were mobilized to find that motto, which would give shape and precision to the cause. Over the weeks "A Better Set of Choices" begat "Safer, Stronger and More Secure," which begat "The Real Deal," which begat "Change Starts Here," which begat "Let America Be America Again," which begat "Hope Is on the Way."

Night and day the serial sloganators did work. And the seasons did turn and the conventions did come and go. Kerry's speeches were shortened, and parts of his life were edited out of his story (adulthood, for example). And yet there was still wailing in the House of Kerry for the message was still unhoned.

Kerry himself pinpointed the problem. Of advisers, there were not enough! So this month yet more were brought in, mostly from the camp of Clinton. There is McCurry, Lockhart, Carville and Begala. There is Greenberg and Wolfson.

And so it came to pass there are no swing voters left, because they've all been hired by campaign Kerry. They form a great and mighty leviathan, dedicated to the proposition that John Kerry should believe in something. The flow chart is as clear as can be. Sasso reports to Lockhart, Devine, Sosnick, Cutter and Cahill, while Cutter reports to Devine, Mellman, McCurry, Shrum and herself - except on weekends, when Devine reports to Mellman and Sosnick and Cahill reports to McCurry and Sasso. Lockhart handles strategic response, McCurry daily response, Cutter tactical response and Cahill metaresponse.

Vast is the empire crafting Kerry's creed. Immense is the army of Michelangelos trying to sculpture the melted marshmallow of Kerry's core. And the seasons do turn and the polls do shift and the rending of garments gives way to the sunshine of hope and back again.

And tumultuous is the cry of the strategists, and loud are the furies of the campaign, but in the center there is a silence. For in the beginning all was vacuum and a void, and while all the king's horses and all the king's men do build this grand and mighty structure, the sound of their hammers echoes limitlessly in the hollow within.

link:
here (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/18/opinion/18brooks.html?ex=1097467200&en=417518fb706ef1be&ei=5070&oref=login&ex=1096171200&en=3e484dece2aa1ccb&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1)

[Warham]

Sounds like proof to me.

If it comes from the NY Times, it must be true to FORD.

[FORD]

But if you look at the "flow chart" paragraph which immediately follows, which details who reports to whom in Kerryland, you see that McCurry and Lockhart are referenced again, while Carville and Begala are not. Which to me sounds like the two of them were consulted a time or two, but not officially employed by the campaign, as McCurry and Lockhart have been.

[wraytw]

It's fun watching you squirm to find excuses, FORD.

[FORD]

No excuses, just looking at the facts.

[Big Train]

FORD: THIRD REQUEST...what is your response to my question? I sense some squirming.

[diamondD]

It's sad to see someone so blinded by ideology they can't be honest with themselves and admit that something they accuse others of doing happens on both sides. But that's the liberal way...

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by FORD
What's your source? (and please tell me it's not Mush Limpdick)



Why do you need a damn source to prove Carville is a damn consult whoring money for John fuckin' Kerry? That is common knowledge at this point in the game.

Carville was debating the news job/political consultant point with O'Reilly when he was on the O'Reilly Factor. I'll see if I can dig up the transcripts. It was a very civil discussion, actually. But the fact of the matter is Corporal Cueball is a paid hack of Kerry, Inc trying to generate funds for those creeps. :gulp:

[Lqskdiver]

Something tells me, FORD isn't coming back into this thread. At least, until he finds some shred of proof to contradict these FACTS.

Hey, FORD, in your UNBIASED opinion, do you think what this guy did was wrong?

If you can't at least see the unethical views displayed by THIS individual as wrong, yet can accuse someone else of wrongdoing, you really have no hope or CLUE as to basic human behaviour.