PBS Selects Frank Luntz for post-forum analysis - Action Alert!

[rhombus]

PBS has selected GOP "pollster" Frank Luntz to appearon the Tavis Smiley show to critique the Democratic debate on Thursday, June 28. This notorious partisan should not be framing the debate in the Democratic nominating process. Media Matters is asking everyone to contact PBS to voice displeasure. The text of today's email:

PBS Selects Frank Luntz for post-forum analysis
Dear Friend:

I'm sure you've already heard that PBS will be hosting the next Democratic presidential forum on Thursday, June 28, at Howard University in Washington, D.C. What you may not know is that PBS has invited Frank Luntz, a longtime Republican pollster and strategist, to provide "immediate public feedback on the performances of the candidates" during post-forum coverage on the Tavis Smiley program.

Of course, when Luntz's appearance was announced, the press release made no mention of his Republican ties or long history of being criticized for his work.

» Take Action Today!

If you don't know much about Frank Luntz, here are some important facts about this discredited Republican pollster:

In 1997, the American Association for Public Opinion Research formally reprimanded Luntz for refusing to release documentation in support of comments he made to the media regarding his polling work on the Republican Party's 1994 "Contract with America" campaign platform, according to a Salon.com article.
Washington Post polling director Richard Morin reported that the National Council on Public Polls
censured Luntz "for allegedly mischaracterizing on MSNBC the results of focus groups he conducted during the <2000> Republican Convention."
In September 2004, MSNBC dropped Luntz from its planned coverage of that year's presidential debate coverage, following a letter from Media Matters that outlined Luntz's GOP ties and questionable polling methodology.

They're asking people to email PBS to let them know this is unacceptable.

Contact PBS Today!

Ms. Paula Kerger
President & CEO
2100 Crystal Dr
Arlington, VA 22202
[e-mail]
[phone]

Neal Kendall
Executive Producer
Tavis Smiley Show
4401 W Sunset Blvd
Los Angeles, CA 90027
[e-mail]
[phone]



Please kick and recommend. Thanks!

[MADem]

1. OK, here's my effort

Why don't you just let Karl Rove frame the talking points following the Democratic debate?

Please--give us a break. Luntz is easily the most offensive partisan hack the GOP has in their polling drawer. If his fat mug is front and center, I'm changing the channel. We deserve better.

I thought it had a certain succinct quality.....

[liberaldemocrat7]

18. Send Scandinavian REPUBLICANS back to Scandinavia

Send Frank Luntz and Grover Norquist back to their ancestral homes in Scandinavia.

[Benhurst]

2. So much for the [Re]Public[can] Broadcasting Service. I'm not surprised.

[rurallib]

3. Posted this yesterday and got little response.

I did call and got a very disinterested person who said "OK".

[wakemeupwhenitsover]

4. I emailed yesterday from the thread in GD.

Haven't got anything back from PBS. Not even a form 'thanks for your concern.'

Very discouraging.

[Kerrytravelers]

5. Just curious, because I don't know. DId PBS have a Democrat provide debate analysis when the Repubs

debated?

Again, not being argumentative, but I just don't know. If they did, then having Luntz (ewwww) would be fair. If not, then there is a serious problem in fairness going on at PBS.

[tbyg52]

7. It might be fair if that were the case

and if they gave a synopsis of his background, but I get the impression they are planning on presenting him as "unbiased."

Please let me be #30,000,000 and:
%$#*$#&!#&%# Tom Delay!

[MADem]

33. The counterpart to this debate (for the GOP) is in SEP. I thought Luntz was gonna do it then, too..

Not positive, though...

[tbyg52]

6. They haven't backed down on this yet?

They can kiss my money goodbye.

And in case this is #30,000,000:
%$#*$#&!#&%# Tom Delay!

[mzmolly]

8. Will do,

Thanks!

[Maraya1969]

9. This looks like the same show and it seems as it that Lutz man is not on the list

Join Tavis Smiley as he moderates the "All American Presidential Forums on PBS." The Democratic Forum will take place on June 28, 2007, from 9:00-10:30 p.m. ET at Howard University in Washington, DC. The event will be televised live on PBS and simultaneously webcast here at pbs.org.

The All American Presidential Forums on PBS mark the first time that a panel exclusively comprised of journalists of color will be represented in primetime. Questions to the candidates will be posed by Tavis and journalists Michel Martin of National Public Radio, nationally syndicated columnist Ruben Navarrette, Jr. and USA Today and Gannett News Service columnist DeWayne Wickham.

Inspired by the book The Covenant With Black America, the candidates will be asked about issues ranging from healthcare and housing to Katrina relief, the economy and the environment.

The following presidential candidates will participate in the Democratic Forums on June 28, 2007 on the campus of Howard University in Washington, DC: Sen. Joseph Biden, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Christopher Dodd, former Sen. John Edwards, Sen. Mike Gravel, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Sen. Barack Obama and Gov. Bill Richardson.

A second Forum for Republican presidential candidates will be held on September 27, 2007, on the campus of Morgan State University in Baltimore, MD.

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/special/forums/about.html

[wakemeupwhenitsover]

10. I wonder if PBS pulled puntz?

Here's the article from media matters:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200706260002?f=h_latest

As Media Matters for America has noted, Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who the Public Broadcasting Service has announced will provide "public feedback" following PBS' coverage of the June 28 Democratic presidential forum, has shown open disdain for Democratic priorities and candidates and has reportedly been reprimanded and censured by his peers for withholding and misrepresenting polling data and methodology. But, in addition to leaving out these facts from its press release announcing Luntz's participation, PBS, which referred to Luntz only as a "noted pollster," made no mention of the fact that Luntz has worked for former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a potential general election opponent of one of the forum's participants, and has heaped praise on Giuliani this year.

[jenmarie]

11. Thanks for posting the link

to the Media Matters article. I wrote PBS via MM's site expressing my concern. I hope everyone will write.

[MADem]

14. As I said below, I heard back from them--here's what they said about Putz, er, Luntz

He's apparently going to be on Tavis's show, after the fact. I wonder if Tavis actually invited him, or he was shoved down the man's throat? It might be interesting to ASK Tavis what the story was.....



Thank you for contacting PBS. We greatly appreciate your interest in our programming. Like you, PBS recognizes the importance of an informed and engaged citizenry.

The "All-American Presidential Forums," which are moderated by Tavis Smiley, is an historic broadcast marking the first time that a panel exclusively comprised of journalists of color will be represented in primetime.

Mr. Smiley, along with journalists Michel Martin of National Public Radio, nationally syndicated columnist Ruben Navarrette Jr. and USA Today and Gannett News Service columnist DeWayne Wickham, will question candidates on issues ranging from healthcare and housing to Katrina relief, the economy and the environment, among others.

PBS is proud to offer a live broadcast of this event, which is the first major opportunity for the candidates to present a detailed discourse and dialogue on their social agendas.

Regarding your concerns about Dr. Luntz, I would like to clarify that he is not participating in the forum itself or in the live broadcast of the event. Rather, Dr. Luntz was selected by Mr. Smiley to obtain on-the-spot feedback from a group of everyday citizens who will be watching the forum live at Howard University.

Dr. Luntz will appear as a guest on Mr. Smiley's regularly scheduled program on Friday evening, accompanied by the 30 people who participated in the Instant Response focus group to discuss the results of the study. We have full confidence in Mr. Smiley's abilities to produce an intelligent, thought-provoking program and in his skills as an interviewer.

I hope you will watch the "All-American Forum" this evening and tune into the second forum for Republican candidates, which is scheduled to air in September.

Sincerely,

PBS Viewer Services

[MADem]

13. I got a letter from them. They say LUNTZ is gonna do a forum on Tavis's show on Friday

NOT after the debate.

That's what they said, anyway.

[Gabi Hayes]

29. please email them back, and ask them to explained what happened between

April fourth and the time they responded to you.

see post number 28 for their press release.

fricking LIARS

[MADem]

34. See post 32 downthread--I did as you suggested, but managed to put it in the wrong location!!! nt

[bigdarryl]

12. There don't have a democrat that can do this

[Tellurian]

15. I just called. And Paula Kerger, herself answered the phone..

She suggested calling Neal Kendall at The Tavis Smiley Show to voice our opinions. She was very nice. I told her in the future to please check on who the well respected PBS is affiliating themselves with; that it doesn't make sense to have a Republican commentator giving feedback on a Democratic Debate..

[DFW]

16. I've been with Luntz a number of times at discussions

And though I've never found anything I wanted to say to him, it's
not hard to figure out where he's coming from, especially when the
cameras are turned off.

There's no denying the guy has an IQ off the charts, but he has
no compunction whatsoever of twisting things to make himself and
his money-givers come out on top, the truth be damned. He also has
a very disarming (if you wanna fall for it) Uriah Heep "very 'umble"
front, self-effacing manner, and won't hesitate for a second to make
fun of himself if he feels it'll disarm anything harsh coming his way.
But make no mistake about it, he knows who pays his (enormous, and saldy
well-deserved) bills, and he is true to his masters. He is well-known for
involvement in the smear campaign that toppled Tom Daschle and replaced
him with the far-right John Thune in South Dakota. He is more a propagandist
than a pollster, and he is tops in his field, maybe THE best.

I'm not sure I'd want someone THAT coldly and calculatingly brilliant--
but with Frank's lack of a conscience--working for us. One thing is
for sure, though: I sure wish we had someone that good at what he does.
We would have turned "Swiftboaters" into "Shitgloaters" in no time flat.

[Tellurian]

21. Good analysis!

Thanks for posting- Wish we had found out sooner. Maybe the Dems will stage a walkout unless they recruit a Dem for feedback after the debate..This, imo, can change the whole completion of the Dems drive to take the WH.

[Gabi Hayes]

23. except for the brilliant part. I've seen him on shows where he can't follow

a script, and read an interview with him, where he comes off as nothing but a RW talking point-spewing lunatic, with all the "folsky charm" of a carbuncle.

I don't get the brilliant part at all. He's brilliant, maybe, to the credulous media and uninformed media consumers who rely on TV for their news, but he's as transparent as the skin on a two day old green onion AFAIC.

[Gabi Hayes]

24. see this

Q; You are close friends with House Speaker Newt Gingrich. He's had some problems lately. Will he survive? What's the spin?


A: It's not spinning! Newt is the most controversial politician of his age because he is the most significant.
I've had the opportunity to get to know him on a very personal basis, to spend weekends with him flying around the country. He is the equivalent of the the greatest professor I have ever had. He's the greatest mind I've ever met.

http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0397/party.html

read the interview and tell me you still think he's brillian.

I understand your point, but his "brilliance" lies in plugging into old concepts, first expressed by Bernays, then employed by the likes of Geobbels, then modernized by Deaver and the other marketeers in the Reagan WH, honed to perfection by Luntz and Rove. the american public is SO easily led that it doesn't take brilliance to accomplish what he's done, especially given the utterly complicit media, which happily parrots whatever boilerplate is issued from wingnut HQ

[DFW]

25. I don't get American TV while on station, so I don't see a lot of that stuff

And if he has trouble with spontaneous responses, then that is
a serious chink in his armor if he is going to do live TV, but
the fact remains that he has been in on, or at the head of, a LOT
of right-wing propaganda campaigns that have worked where the candidate
had nothing. Stuff like "tax relief" instead of "cutting taxes for the
wealthy," or "death tax" instead of "inheritance tax," etc. That is pure
Frank Luntz--reframe anything so your argument sounds great and their
argument sounds awful, no matter if the opposite is true or not.
And I still say he is brilliant at it. It doesn't matter one whit to
his clients if he can't do it spontaneously on some cable station. What
matters to them is that he come up with stuff that they can say on TV
over and over again and sound like heroes while being bums. And he DOES
come up with it, time and time again.

Don't underestimate (or even misunderestimate) this guy. He is good at what
he does, and he gets paid a fortune in Repulican dollars for doing it, so
don't look for him to retire any time soon, or switch allegiance. They
will always have more money than we do for this kind of stuff because guys
like George Soros do not spend tens of millions on slime, and guys like
Richard Mellon-Scaife do.

[Gabi Hayes]

27. again, I agree with you, but I don't agree that he's brilliant. he's smart, clever, workmanlike,

, talented, devious, etc., those words I'd have no trouble using.

but he's NOT brilliant. what he's done has been accomplished more with perseverance than anything

since you say you don't get to watch much TV while onstation, I'm guessing perhaps you don't realize how EASYILY swayed most people are by the most simplistic propaganda. it happened here at DU, WRT all the people who've swallowed the shallowest BS spewed about Hugo Chavez by the same RW sources they excoriate for toeing the Bush line

again, I don't disagree with anything you've said, aside from your use of the word brilliant to describe the guy

besides, how can you call anybody brilliant who wears a dead wombat on his head?

[DFW]

31. A dead wombat? Haven't seen that one, but it doesn't surprise me

At a thing where we all were at in 2004, Hillary was
taking questions from the people present, and Luntz got
up to kneel at her feet. It was all part of his "humble"
act, but it sure looked weird. He pulled an even weirder
stunt with Bill Clinton a year later. No need for details,
but the guy is definitely not above acting a little batty.

I guess I am "musunderestimating" the impact of dumbdown TV
on people back home. I try to keep in touch, but getting personal
emails from VIPs (as opposed to canned funding requests that we
must all get), while fun and ego-boosting etc., doesn't really
give me an idea on to what extent daily doses of MSNBC or whatever
really influence real people out there, so you're probably dead
on with that one. Maybe ignorance is bliss in that case--the truth
might depress me.

As for Luntz being "brilliant," I meant that in the sense that he
has come up with a whole verbal strategy on his own that is to the
Nixon Dirty Tricks team what the Blackberry is to the pocket calculator
of the 1970s. I credit (or blame) him with changing the rules of how
debates on issues are fought, and coming up with "redefinitions" of
things we didn't even know could be "re-defined." And he recognized
the financial reward out there for him by milking it correctly. He
once came close (not on camera, of course) to even admitting that he
got involved with the Republicans only because they paid better. How
mercenary is that?

But he did help them win, win, and win again, and became a multi-
millionaire in the process, all with a well thought-out plan that
worked nearly flawlessly for him for over a decade. It takes more
than street smarts to do that on your own. Bush has his whole life
handed to him. Luntz made his own up as he went along. I don't admire
what he has done, or how he did it, and some perserverence was obviously
needed on his part. But he had the vision, and the ideas. That still
looks kind of brilliant to me.

The dead wombat does demand a re-assessment, though, no question.......

[Robeson]

17. Here's a link to Tavis Smiley's comments about this...

...to Amy Goodman on "Democracy Now". It's a transcript of the interview. Scroll down towards the bottom...

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/28/1433235

[MADem]

19. Interesting. Tavis disses Brock, in oblique fashion.

I guess he's "unforgiven." Wonder which Brock-ian issue sticks in his craw? The gay thing, the Rightwing Anita Hill bashing ancient history, or something else?

That said, what is interesting here is that LUNTZ OFFERED to do this. We do know that Luntz was thrown to the wolves by Rove during the last election...perhaps this is Luntz's way to try to pull a (irony alert, here!!) Brockian "Blinded By the Right" mea culpa tour, using Tavis as a launching point:

TAVIS SMILEY: I thank you for the question, because it allows me to set the record straight. First of all, with all due respect to Mr. Brock, I think one has to consider the source. It always amazes me that people, through their own choices, lose their own integrity, lose their own credibility, and for some reason find a way to then, from time to time, start attacking others who protect and regard their integrity and their credibility, like I do, about things that they’re quite frankly wrong about. Mr. Brock first reported that Frank Luntz was going to be on and participating in the debate. He’s not. You will not see or hear from -- his name will not be raised Thursday night, tonight, in the debate, Frank Luntz.

What Mr. Luntz has been asked to do, what he quite frankly offered to do, was to set up a people-metering room where some thirty African Americans -- they’re all black, they’re all Democrats, they’re all voters -- are going to be asked what they think of the debate, the forum, as it unfolds. So, you know, Amy, how this people metering works, so we’ll be able to read the data as to what they thought about every person on the stage answering these questions, as they were answering the questions. And so, on my Friday night show -- Mr. Luntz has been a guest on my program a couple times, as has Newt Gingrich and any number of other Republicans. I talk to everybody and try to ask them questions I think they ought to be asked. He’s been a guest on my TV program before, he’s going to be again on the program Friday night. And the role he’s playing is helping us to understand what the top line is for what these African American Democrats had to say.

Mr. Brock is wrong. There is no spin being done here. How do you spin thirty black folk who are Democrats, and the machine tells you what they thought. So Frank does this for a living. He works for any number of organizations: CNN and FOX News Channel and NBC and the BBC. He’s done this for a lot of people. And so, he’s doing people metering for us. He’s going to tell us at the top of the show on Friday night, the day after. So tomorrow night, Frank Luntz will give us the three or four headlines that we can take from what these African Americans thought, what they thought during the forum tonight, and then we can talk to them. I’m going to be joined by all thirty of those persons. So the balance of the show, the bulk of the show Friday night, tomorrow night, is really talking to the people who were in the people-metering room to understand what they felt. I might also add that we’ve been invited all kinds of media people, and many have accepted, to sit in that room to cover that aspect of the story about the African American Democrats who are being people-metered.

So this is really, quite frankly, much ado about nothing. I have wasted three minutes of your good television time responding to something that is, quite frankly, nonsensical, it is erroneous, it’s absolutely not true. PBS put out a statement on Wednesday addressing those issues. I think that when people put lies out, you’ve got to respond to them quickly. With all due respect to Mr. Brock, he got this one wrong.

Ya know, with all due respect to Tavis, whom I like, he needs to understand that when ya lie down with dogs, ya get up with fleas....

[xxqqqzme]

20. There is something very, very fishy about this whole thing

Putz doesn't 'offer' to do ANYthing w/o the big buck$$$$$$$$$$ coming from somewhere to enable him to accomplish his pre-conceived objective.

Follow the money is now a cliche but oh, the things we learn.

[MADem]

22. Not necessarily. Luntz was tossed out of the GOP fold. He lost a HUGE RNC contract.

They've put a scarlet A on him, those Republicans...so now, he has to come crawling to the "greater polling community."

He's probably doing this for scale, just to "prove" that he can be nonpartisan.

Apparently, he was incredibly SHITTY to Bonehead Boehner, and when Boney got the Majority slot (now the MINORITY slot, ha ha!!!) he got the knife:

When John Boehner (R-Ohio) was installed as House Majority Leader in February, Luntz took a powder ... sort of. According to Roll Call, Luntz, who has had disagreements with Boehner, sent an e-mail to the staff of his Alexandria, VA-based Luntz Research Companies, with the subject line "Where We Stand."

The e-mail, sent after Luntz was excluded from a GOP House retreat, began: "By now, you are all probably aware that House Republicans have a new Majority Leader and he is not a fan of myself or my work. That's just the way it is."

Claiming that Boehner has "not always been an effective communicator" Luntz continued, "We have a long history that has not been pleasant. ... For 10 years, even though he was Conference Chair and a Committee Chair, I have actually had the upper hand. But now that he's in charge, I guess it's payback time."......."I am not happy at all about the situation, but this is what politics is all about. When Lott lost his job, so did dozens of people. But after a few months, we found a way to integrate ourselves with , and I will find some way to work through this challenge. Those of you who like the Congressional work will still be able to hone your skills. We just won't have the immediately impact we once had. We'll have to work a little harder and be a little smarter.”

"This is a good lesson. I just wish I didn't have to learn it now."

http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=129

[Gabi Hayes]

26. Interesting, indeed, considering he pretty much LIES about Media Matters' statement:

they BASED it on this PBS release:

According to an April 4 PBS press release, Luntz will participate in coverage of the June 28 candidate forum, which will be televised live and moderated by PBS host Tavis Smiley. In fact, the release states that ''immediate public feedback on the performance of the candidates will be conducted by noted pollster Frank Luntz, who will also appear on 'Tavis Smiley' on PBS the following evening to discuss his findings."



so their statement was based on PBS' press release, and Smiley is dissing them very disingenuously for getting Luntz's participation 'wrong'

notice how he doesn't 'waste' his time dealing with the indisputably factually accurate statements made in the original letter regarding Luntz's record of falsifiying data, being canned by MSNBC, being censured by his own pollsters' guild (whatever).
even craven MSNBC wised up and stopped using him. Smiley's haughty, creepy dismissal of Brock, and willing acceptance of Luntz's 'offer' is very disconcerting, and makes me think even less of Smiley than I already do.

and, what about this, Tavis, you......I'll stop there:

''The fact that PBS has not acknowledged Luntz's partisan affiliation -- either in its original press release or in today's statement -- makes PBS' use of him in this way all the more troubling.''

http://mediamatters.org/items/200706270006?f=h_top

[MADem]

30. I'm wondering precisely WHY Tavis finds Brock so completely "unforgiven"

Could it be that he can't forgive for some offense when Brock worked for the Weekly Standard? Could it be "The Real Anita Hill" that he can't forgive? Or does he not like gay guys? Or guys who switch their affiliations away from the GOP?

Or is there something else?

Does anyone know if Brock ever did a hit piece on Smiley when he worked for the Dark Side? The anger against Brock seems, well, PERSONAL. And there's no way a professional journalist like Tavis Smiley can possibly be unaware of the controversy surrounding Luntz. The Hill was fucking a-BUZZ when he got the back of the GOP hand...it was 'topic du jour' for the longest time!

[Gabi Hayes]

38. Luntz was on Tavis' show in February. here's the transcript

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/200702/20070207_luntz.html

perhaps he's made because the MM response includes the fact that he appeared on the show and waxed eloquently on the wonderfulness of his former employer Giuliani, a fact that Tavis 'forgot' to mention, along with PBS

surprised?

http://mediamatters.org/items/200706260002

race me to see what he had so say in that Feb interview. I'm starting it now....can't wait to see what sorts of craven points Luntz made without any refutation by Smiley. how many unchecked lies does Luntz get away with?

[MADem]

40. Tavis's intro doesn't even MENTION the GOP. At all. Now THAT's bullshit!!!

In the INTRO, anyway....

Tavis: Dr. Frank Luntz is a respected political pollster and communications consultant who founded the Luntz Research Company back in 1992. Since then, he has consulted for numerous Fortune 500 firms, and is a frequent TV commentator for “NBC News,” among others. His new book is called “Words That Work: It’s Not What You Say, It’s What People Hear.” And I actually like this book, I like it a lot. Frank Luntz, nice to have you here.

And how can the baaastid ask THIS question, without first mentioning that LUNTZ was the guy who PUT the WORDS in those GOP mouths?????

Tavis: The Republicans. Let’s talk politics for a second. The Republicans historically, not of late, of course, but historically, certainly in my lifetime, your lifetime, they’ve been better at this word game than Democrats have been. Gingrich was really good at it.

He gets to it a little later, but he treads way too lightly.

Agggh...I remember watching this show, and feeling ....well, a bit...slimed.

[Gabi Hayes]

43. that's why I don't watch him. he's so transparently creepy. reminds me of

the guy from Music Man...don't ask me why/how. just does.

and I'll bet you've already gotten to the Walmart part, during which Luntz uses his pollster skills to read Tavis like the comic book that he is

that was hilarious, especially this little snip, which, I can only infer, must have been a Freudian slip, or something:

Tavis: You gotta always stand on your truth, and speak truth to power. That’s not what this program’s all about.

[MADem]

45. Ya gotta ask yourself, who isn't bought and paid for at this stage of the game? NT

[MADem]

32. Well, let's see if they give me an answer to this

Dear Viewer Services;

Did you (PBS) change your mind about using Frank Luntz in the post-debate discussions? Your April news release said that Mr. Luntz would appear immediately following the debate:

''...immediate public feedback on the performance of the candidates will be conducted by noted pollster Frank Luntz, who will also appear on 'Tavis Smiley' on PBS the following evening to discuss his findings."

Can you explain why there was a change in the use of Mr. Luntz? Was it in response to objections from fair-minded people? Your response to me infers that I was mistaken, and that you never intended for Mr. Luntz to appear after the debate, yet your own press release in April said otherwise.

I await your clarification. Thank you in advance for your response.

Sincerely,

[Gabi Hayes]

35. excellent. bet they don't respond

got something else on Tavis. guess who his Feb 7 guest was?

[MADem]

37. They might. They responded to my initial request. I'm pretty polite when I ask these pesky

questions. I usually get civil responses. On the odd occasion where I get spitting-mean-mad ones, I write back and tell them how childish and rude they are. I've gotten APOLOGIES every so often.

So who was Tavis's guest? ON EDIT.... Ahhh, Frankie!!!!!!

There's an accomodation there, perhaps???

[Gabi Hayes]

28. that really PISSES me OFF! why did she end the show with that horseshit statement?

I hope she comes back to it, as did media matters, at their site

Smiley is nothing if not disingenuous in his little rant, with doesn't deal with ANY factual assertions made by MM, except their intial one, which is BASED on the PBS April 4 press release, saying THIS:


According to an April 4 PBS press release, Luntz will participate in coverage of the June 28 candidate forum, which will be televised live and moderated by PBS host Tavis Smiley. In fact, the release states that ''immediate public feedback on the performance of the candidates will be conducted by noted pollster Frank Luntz, who will also appear on 'Tavis Smiley' on PBS the following evening to discuss his findings."

infuriating, much?

[librechik]

36. BTW, this has NOTHING to do with the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

It is strictly a PBS/Tavis Smiley deal.

[Gabi Hayes]

39. so? who calls that show news anymore, anyway?

PBS has been in the tank for a very long time, with a few lonely exceptions, NOT including Newshour.

[librechik]

42. you got that right...

just sayin

[Gabi Hayes]

44. goody! not in the mood for arguing that point here.

getting tired of that sort of thing lately

pretty sad to see what they've become

PBS=Pure Bullshit, Systematically (destroying democracy)

[Gabi Hayes]

41. Smiley nothing but a cheesy, disingenuous, sellout hack? you be the judge, from this interview with

Luntz, from February

Tavis: Dr. Frank Luntz is a respected political pollster and communications consultant who founded the Luntz Research Company back in 1992. Since then, he has consulted for numerous Fortune 500 firms, and is a frequent TV commentator for “NBC News,” among others. His new book is called “Words That Work: It’s Not What You Say, It’s What People Hear.” And I actually like this book, I like it a lot. Frank Luntz, nice to have you here.


http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/200702/20070207_luntz.html

and that's just the INTRO. not one word about his affilitation with the republican party, how he and Newt WROTE the Contract with America together, how he was the mastermind behind the vicious campaign in 94 that allowed the pugs to take congress.

[CBHagman]

46. Luntz came up with"We're fighting them over there" memo.

As a couple Brian Faler and John Harris of The Washington Post pointed out a few years back, Frank Luntz is the source for the various talking points the GOP (including the White House) trots out when discussing Irq or the war on terror. This includes the notion that the U.S. must fight terrorists in Iraq in order to avoid facing them here in the States.. That's rather a stupid and illogical assertion, given that the September 11th attacks A) did not involve Iraq, B) terrorists have already been here, C), there is not a finite number of terrorists who will conveniently go to one place in order to be annihilated, and D) it is generally thought that terrorists of one sort or another live in scores of countries worldwide.

Here's the link to the article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54906-2004Jun19.html