Dishonor Guard (Bush, Moore, Clark & Dissertion) American Prospect 1.26

[KittyWampus]

Dishonor Guard
The press is lining up to defend George W. Bush's National Guard record -- by stubbornly refusing to discuss the facts.

By Paul Waldman

When Michael Moore called George W. Bush a "deserter" at a January 18 rally for Wesley Clark, he stepped way over the line, injecting into the public discourse a scurrilous charge with no basis in fact, the kind of defamation that has rightly earned the moniker "political hate speech" from Republicans. Or at least that's what you'd think if you listened to reporters' comments on Moore's statement. Speaking for his colleagues, ABC's Peter Jennings told Clark during Thursday's debate, "That's a reckless charge not supported by the facts. And I was curious to know why you didn't contradict him, and whether or not you think it would've been a better example of ethical behavior to have done so."

Clark declined to do so, saying he didn't know enough about it. Unfortunately, most Americans don't either -- because reporters have refused to tell them. But the press consensus has been reached: Moore's charge was beyond the pale, and General Clark made a big mistake by not repudiating it. "Clark should have distanced himself from the remark," wrote The Boston Globe. On FOX News, Chris Wallace said Clark's failure to do so was the one place in the debate when "my reporter's antenna went up. And I thought, 'This is news' Doesn't that raise questions of perhaps being a little amateur?" Clark, the United Press International's story about the debate contended, "may have stumbled most when he was quizzed as to why he stayed silent when documentary filmmaker Michael Moore, who has endorsed him, called Bush a deserter in Clark's presence and Clark did not immediately condemn the remark or disassociate himself from it."

If you've been reading the news, though, you may've a hard time figuring out just what Moore was talking about. The New York Times referred obliquely to "Bush's attendance record with the National Guard in Texas," while National Public Radio offered that the charge "refer to his time in the Texas Air National Guard." The Los Angeles Times gave a non-explanation, writing, "Bush served as a pilot in the Texas National Guard during the Vietnam War, a relatively safe posting. In 1972, Bush was allowed to transfer to the Alabama National Guard for three months so he could work on the campaign of a Senate candidate there."

http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2004/01/waldman-p-01-26.html

[dennis4868]

1. Thanks for the post....

great article....I only wish the mainstreem media consisted of people like Paul Waldman who look for the truth...it is astonishing that Peter Jennings, who gets paid millions of dollars to make sure we are all informed voters would say that what Moore said about Bush is reckless and not supported by the facts...these are sad times for the media in this country. Hopefully one day things will change. I heard someone on C-SPAN today say that we have gone from Woodward & Bernstein to the Beltway Boys in terms of getting the news today.

[Mz Pip]

2. Interesting to note

that UPI and Fox News are included in the list of media whores who jumped all over Clark for not condemning Moore. Duh.

MzPip
:dem:

[amber dog democrat]

3. This is poison for the main stream media

This cant be touched with out courting severe reprocussions to the corporate media.
But its getting lots of attention all the same.

Given that the lies and hype that we rely on for news is meant to draw attention away from issues or events, I am not surprised. I am thinking that eventually bush is going to have to deny or try to explain away this issue.

I am grateful it is still being brought up. We are not a police state, yet.