michael moore responds to peter jennings

[morgan2]

ATTENTION PETER JENNINGS: George W. Bush is a Deserter!!!


In tonight's presidential debate, Peter Jennings said that I made a reckless charge about Bush being a deserter. The facts are the facts. The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, The New Republic and numerous other publications have all called into question Bush's whereabouts when he was supposed to be serving our country. The only thing reckless is how people like Peter Jennings refuse to report the truth.



http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php

[bicentennial_baby]

1. Beautiful!!

Thanks Mike!!

[madmax]

9. Now it's time to send more money to the chooo chooo

:P

[neverforget]

2. Go get'em Moore!

[madmax]

3. Thanks for posting that!

:pals:

[Bread and Circus]

4. Good for Mike...to hell w/ Jennings...the media has blood on its hands...

and they need to start facing the truth.

[Carni]

24. Not that am a Jennings fan BUT...

If you ask me Jennings did us all a favor by bringing the AWOL thing up in front of however many million people.

Now that it's "out there" will bush be forced to try to dispute it?

[pretzel4gore]

33. right....

maybe jennings is covering his butt (nudge nudge wink) but he is paid $28 thousand dollars a day; and that aint for his earnest professionalism...his truthful integrity, or his fine vocalisings.

[tishaLA]

5. All fucking right

eom

[robsul82]

6. Whoops...

Michael Moore is on Peter Jennings like Michael Moore on a glazed strawberry-filled donut, baby!

Later.

RJS

[exJW]

8. LOL! eom

[Dookus]

7. this is awesome.....

and perfect for Clark. He doesn't have to make the charge against Bush, or even defend it. But the charge still gets out there, and there'll be a lot of attention on it after tonight. Great strategy.

[Don Claybrook]

10. Good for Moore.

The question that wasn't addressed, and certainly not by the fox idiots after the debate, was Bush a deserter? I hope that the debate question sparks some nationwide conversation on the issue.

I think we all know Bush was AWOL for the first 30 days, after which time he, by definition, became a deserter.

I wish Clark had given a diplomatic, yet stronger answer. He could've said that the question merited further study.

[snyttri]

16. He stuck up for Moore more than Moore hoped for.

[dennis4868]

18. It was not simply 30 days....

Bush was unaccounted for a hole year...May 1972 through May 1973.

[Don Claybrook]

21. Agreed. It's AWOL for the first 30 days

Then you're a deserter, and in for a world of pain, unless of course your daddy is rich, powerful, and extremely connected.

[tishaLA]

11. HaHa! And now Bill Bennett

aka Mr. Gambling, Whip-Me-Mommy Please, is on Hanutty wringing his little fat hands over Clark not repudiating it! And Sean is Sad! Sad! Sad! Gen. Clark won't say Moore is a bad bad man!

[sillymikey]

12. lol

that was quick! good job Michael!

[David Zephyr]

13. Nice. But It's Lost on a Website and Won't Ever Be Mentioned by Jennings.

Sad, but true.

[snyttri]

14. This may be a chance to e-mail the media before they write the debate

story.

[philosophie_en_rose]

15. Moore v. Jennings.

Jennings was so off-base with his question to Clark. If he has an issue with the FACT that W is a deserter, then he should look it up himself or take it up with Moore.

Screw Jennings. A General outranks a pissant National Guard deserter anyday.

[MIMStigator]

17. Good

job

[AntiCoup2K4]

19. The problem with this response...

Is that the corporate media, FAUX News and the sheep who believe what they say are not going to believe this from Michael Moore. They already have him condemned as a "lunatic liberal who hates America and would say anything about Our Great pResdient".

If Clark himself said it, it would have drawn far more "mainstream" attention. And yes, as we all know, the documentation IS there to back it up.

Clark should say it. I would encourage Dean to say it as well, but then the Rove machine would throw some stupid ski joke up in response. Kerry won't say it, because his DLC bosses wouldn't let him.

We know the truth. Fuck Peter Jennings for trying to suppress it. God help me for thinking he was slightly better than most mediawhores :(

[Avalux]

29. PATIENCE

I have no doubt the question will be answered by Clark when it's best, strategically, for him. He was under attack and gave the best answer at the time. I'm damn proud of him. :bounce:

[Terwilliger]

20. but that doesn't explain Clark's answer

and Moore just re-inforced the idea!

[Skip Intro]

22. Clark would have won me over had he said that

but he didn't, and he didn't

[Fleshdancer]

28. I agree

this was a wonderful opportunity to state the truth and Clark didn't take it. sad.

[funky_bug]

23. Leave it to Moore

to shout loud. Good for him.

[xultar]

25. YEAH HOO!!!! n/t

[Zynx]

26. Fuck Peter Jennings

I hope he gets some terrible disease. People like him are the reason we are in Iraq.

[Leilani]

30. Jennings & Hume

are really close friends...worked together for years.

[HuckleB]

27. A sweet retort!

I used to respect Jennings. Not anymore. There is nothing on television worth watching, news wise, outside of Nova, Frontline and NOW with Bill Moyers.

[in_cog_ni_to]

31. I just sent Michael a

email to thank him for showing Jennings the error of his ways. He is an awesome guy and Claerk is lucky to have him for an endorsement!

Go, Michael!

Go, Wes!

[in_cog_ni_to]

32. Wouldn't it be great

if Moore held a press conference and brought along all of the investigations by The Boston Globe, Washington Post, ect..... SHOW THE WORLD THAT THE CHIMP IS AN AWOL ASSHOLE!

Ha! They will be sorry they started this crap.

[Leilani]

34. Agreed

I posted this same suggestion on another thread.

The info needs to get out there, not by the candidates, by other people.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

37. It'd be even greater if Clark did it.

Send his campaign the info.

[Woodstock]

35. Mike Malloy just said

Peter Jennings got his "carefully ironed pants in a wad" :)

Go for it Moore!!! Kick lying scum right wing butt! Peter Jennings is slime.

And Clark was EXACTLY RIGHT in his response. Very skillful handling. He DIDN'T let Moore down. He supported him fully. He refused to let them manipulate him. They probably had on their agenda:

1. Dean? Spread that he's "angry" around for months. Then when he has a weak moment, spread it around, say he's crazy, mission accomplished.

2. Clark? Corner him into making charges about Bush so Clark can no longer bring up military service and loses his advantage. Spread the charges around, say he's a bad man, mission accomplished.

3. Kerry? ...

Clark screwed up number 2 for them.

[Terwilliger]

36. he's not doing anything...he's reacting

he's reactionary

[Tom Rinaldo]

39. Clark took a hit for all of us during the debate.

The set up was to embarrass Clark into disavowing Moore, because at this stage the percentage of the voting public who have heard anything about Bush being a deserter is tiny, and the charge sounds really really radical. Most people think the charge is blatantly false. Everyone KNOWS Bush served in the National Guard, how could he be a deserter? "He's run for Governor, he's run for President, you can't hide something like that, can you?" It SOUNDS like a wild conspiracy theory, like "the Jews" having advance knowledge about 9/11 or something of that order.

By pointedly NOT disavowing the statement, Clark left it dangling out there, forcing the media to "look into it" for him. This is risky for Clark. During that same reply Clark said he was proud to have Moore's support along with that of other great Americans. He defended Moore's right to express that opinion. Clark did not throw cold water on "Bush as deserter", rather he praised the man making the claim.

The big picture is, Clark is on the ballot in 4 days. His chances to become President go up or down in a serious way sooner rather than later. Still he did not run for shelter. It is one thing to be Ralph Nader, or someone like that, with absolutely no chance to get into the oval office where the levers of power are, and someone can actually make an immediate HUGE difference. Nader can say whatever the fuck he wants, he has nothing to lose, only to gain, by being direct and controversial. Even Howard Dean conceeded, when he was raked over for bringing up a "conspiracy theory" against Bush, that "I don't believe it, it's just something I hear that is out" or words to that effect. I don't fault Dean for using cover in the slightest,he got a lot of shit even as it was. I am just pointing out the real risk Clark has taken now.

Clark refused to disavow it Moore's statement. Clark is being treated tonight by the media almsot exactly as if he made the claim himself, because he would NOT disavow it. The pressure on Clark for not caving during the debate, for not backing away from Moore, is going to be intense over the next few days. I hope we leftists don't go "holier than thou" on Clark now, and get all hung up about Clark not taking an even more radical stance than he did. Remember that currently Clark does NOT draw most of his Primary support from the left, some of us back him sure, but more are backing Dean or Kucinich. Clark needs votes from a lot of moderates to win. Yet it was Clark making the most damning case against Bush and 9/11. It was Clark still expressing admiration for Michael Moore while the right gears up to smear them both as left wing loonies over Moore's Bush went A.W.O.l claim. By not refuting Moore, Clark has given us an opening to make this into a National issue. By not backpeddling away from Moore, Clark stood his ground for all of us.

[HuckleB]

38. Keek.

[fujiyama]

40. Fuck Jennings..

And to think, I thought he was not that bad...I think he's the worst of the three major network hosts after that bullshit...

Fuck him. Fuck ABC. Fuck Diane Sawyer and the rest of these ass holes. Today's debate and the harrasing of Dean's wife really annoyed the hell outta me.

Oh, well ABC doesn't produce anything worth watching, except Nightline, and that's only rarely.