Blitzer: Ellison (not Goode or Prager) "touched off a raging controversy" (from MediaMatters)

[marmar]

As if we needed further proof that Wolfie is a worthless whore.:argh: - O.P.'s comment


from Media Matters:

Blitzer: Ellison "touched off a raging controversy"
Summary: Wolf Blitzer attributed the "raging controversy" over Rep.-elect Keith Ellison's reported intention to use a copy of the Quran in his swearing-in ceremony to Ellison rather than those who have denounced Ellison.

On the December 21 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer attributed a "raging controversy" to Rep.-elect Keith Ellison (D-MN) for his reported intention to use a copy of the Quran as part of his swearing-in ceremony -- rather than attributing it to those who have denounced Ellison. Blitzer's comments came while reporting on a letter written by Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) attacking Muslims and Ellison. Blitzer stated that Ellison's "plans to use the Quran in the swearing-in ceremony have touched off a raging controversy." Blitzer also suggested that Ellison was "war" with Goode.

Blitzer's suggestion that Ellison was to blame echoed Republican strategist Cheri Jacobus, who, as Media Matters for America noted, said she thought it was "a little bit strange" that "we're focusing on" Goode instead of Ellison on the December 21 edition of MSNBC News Live.

Earlier, Blitzer did note that it was Goode who was stirring up controversy: "Virgil Goode is warning a soon-to-be colleague ... not to use the Quran at his swearing-in ceremony, and Goode says he wants to keep other Muslims out of the United States. Will Goode stick to his guns?" CNN correspondent Brian Todd did likewise: "Mr. Goode has generated, as you say, a lot of controversy over that particular letter." In a later report, Todd added that he visited Rocky Mount, Virginia, to see if "Representative Goode could clarify any of his recent remarks that have stirred up so much controversy."

However, in Blitzer's second comment on the issue, he said it was Ellison who "touched off controversy recently when he indicated he'd include the Quran as part of his swearing-in ceremony," while Goode "has done his best to add to the controversy." Blitzer also called the issue "a Quran controversy and a growing war of words."

As the weblog TPMMuckraker noted, the blog Waldo Jaquith posted a controversial letter by Goode saying: "I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America." In the letter, Goode also attacked Ellison: "f American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."

In contrast with some of Blitzer's coverage, other media outlets have laid blame for the controversy on a conservative columnist who criticized Ellison, and not Ellison. As a December 7 article in The Christian Science Monitor noted, it was Townhall.com columnist Dennis Prager's November 28 column about Ellison's intention that "sparked a brouhaha on talk radio, in the blogosphere, and in newspapers across the country." Since the November 28 column, Prager has appeared on MSNBC's Tucker, Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, and CNN's Paula Zahn Now to talk about Ellison's intention to use the Quran.

Onscreen graphics during The Situation Room also suggested that Ellison's decision was to blame for the controversy or stated that Ellison was fighting Goode. Relevant onscreen text read: "Quran Controversy," "Goode vs. Ellison," "Ellison vs. Goode," Controversy Over Ellison's Plan to Use Quran for Swearing In," "War of Words," "Quran Oath," "Bigoted Comments?" and "Goode's Remarks Called 'Islamophobic' ":

http://mediamatters.org/items/200612220009

[tanyev]

1. Ellison touched off a lot of STAGED outrage.

[Eric J in MN]

2. When someone says something which gets criticized,

...it's normal to say the first person started a controversy.

Maybe the critics are right. Maybe the critics are wrong.

But that is how we phrase it.

In the case of Dixie Chicks, I don't object to the lead singer saying she's ashamed Bush is from Texas. But I also don't object to someone saying that sentence started a controversy.

Same with someone saying Ellison started a controversy by saying he's going to use the Koran.

[marmar]

3. Apparently not the Christian Science Monitor....

:think:

[Eric J in MN]

4. The CSM's phrasing may be better,

...but I'm not mad at Wolf Blitzer for saying that Ellison started a controversy.

[Clark2008]

5. But, WHY would that start a controversy?

First, no one is sworn in on anything. The holy books are used for photo ops only.

Second, why wouldn't a Muslim use a Qur'an in his photo op? Christians use Bibles and I suspect that Lieberman or Feingold would use a Torah or a Talmud. What's the big deal?

That should be the issue: not who or what started the "controversy", but WHY IS IT a controversy?

[Atman]

7. The gap between what it is and why it is is huge

Of course the issue should be the why. But it is silly to think that this is the issue which will suddenly turn human nature on its head. That being said, it is also silly to even ask "why" in the first place. The United States is engaged in a de facto Holy War against Muslims, whipped up at every opportunity by The Boy King. We've been conditioned not to ask questions, rather to blindly follow the habitually-failing fake cowboy fake oilman, who didn't even hold a passport before his business interests knowingly installed the into the most important job in the world. We are being bombarded with Christian messages thinly disguised as "news" stories every day, as the Cabal News Networks treat the gospel as a factual news event and treat us to lengthy indoctrination segments on a near-daily basis. Make no mistake...this a Christian nation! The message from Goode is clear; conform or be cast out. We are on a crusade toward some weird sort of democratic Christian theocracy, and folks like Goode are lacking just enough in their knowledge of history to be actually dangerous.

Of course, fake "journalists" who go along with the snake-oil pitch aren't much better, Wolfie.

.

[Eric J in MN]

8. When I saw him interviewed in October and saying he'd use a Koran,

...I thought, "That's nice."

I had no idea that there would be a controversy about it.

Here is the interview with Amanda Congdon:
http://amandacongdon.com/roadblog/2006/10/20/keith-ellison/

[Pushed To The Left]

9. Because prejudice is still alive and well among the far right

Many on the hard right believe that America is a "Christian nation", despite the 1st Amendment being pretty clear about no establishment of religion.

[proud2BlibKansan]

This situation has highlighted the ignorance

of so many on the right, particularly in the media.

The use of a bible (or Koran, in Ellison's case) is a FRIGGIN PHOTO OP!! The members of Congress are not sworn in on anything other than their own word. The bible is then used AFTERWARDS for a photo op. I would LOVE to see one media person point this out when discussing this "controversy". So far, no dice.

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. If I were ever elected to public office...

I would demand to use a copy of the United States Constitution (or the Washington State Constitution, whichever was more appropriate to the circumstances.) I would dearly love to see the neo-cons go ape sh-t over that. :rofl: