Category Archives: national news

Williams story taking on life of its own

A wise person once said that you know you’re toast when the late-night comics start making fun of you.

Welcome to the world of wee-hour funny stuff, Brian Williams.

His story about “misremembering” a shoot-down in Iraq and now his reporting from Hurricane Katrina is taking on a life of its own. It’s turning into a monster that, if it’s left still kicking, is going to knock down the walls of credibility that formerly surrounded the NBC Nightly News anchorman.

http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/news/11526453-148/nbc-news-anchor-brian-williams

This is not a pretty sight to watch.

It well might be that the Katrina story inflicts an even deeper wound in Williams’s reputation.

He reported during the storm in 2005 about seeing “dead bodies” floating in the French Quarter — despite the reported fact at the time that the Quarter suffered hardly any flooding. He told viewers about ingesting floodwater, causing dysentery. Others on the scene have doubted that as well.

What in the world is happening to this individual’s once-stellar journalism career? He’s always been thought of as one of the more thoughtful, everyman, honest newsmen in the business. Williams has exhibited none of the erratic behavior that Dan Rather did when he took over from Walter Cronkite at CBS. He’s been rock solid, steady — and at times self-effacing, such as when he makes appearances on late-night shows to talk about stories he’s covered and the foibles he’s endured.

The so-called misremembering being shot down in Iraq by itself stretches credulity.

Add to that now the reporting of deep flaws in his Hurricane Katrina coverage and you start drawing the picture of a broadcst journalist who’s found himself in some deep doo-doo.

This is not fun to watch.

NBC anchor getting pulled under

It’s hard to watch this, but I’m getting the feeling — just a few days into a strange saga of “misremembrance” — that a highly visible TV news anchor may be on his way out.

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams is still facing questions about a story he made up — or “misremembered,” as he described it — about an incident in Iraq in 2003. He had been saying for a dozen years that a helicopter in which he was a passenger had been shot down by rocket fire. It turns out the shoot-down with Williams aboard didn’t happen.

Williams reported the other day about how an Army command sergeant major had helped rescue him and his fellow passengers after their ship was shot down. The report got a lot of play and Williams stood and accepted the cheers at Madison Square Garden alongside retired Sgt. Maj. Tim Terpak, the young man who engineered the rescue. Other veterans, though, spoke up and said the incident Williams described didn’t happen the way he described it; they said Williams wasn’t aboard the stricken Chinook helicopter.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/rieder/2015/02/05/brian-williams-unmitigated-disaster/22915325/

Now comes word that Williams might have fabricated what he saw in New Orleans while covering the Hurricane Katrina disaster in 2005. Williams reported serious flooding in the French Quarter. To borrow a phrase: oops! The French Quarter largely escaped the floodwaters that devastated much of the Big Easy.

NBC News has announced it is launching an internal investigation into what Williams said and did in Iraq and in New Orleans.

Williams has traded on the trust he has built with news watchers over many years in the anchor’s chair.

It’s difficult to imagine how a viewer of the NBC newscast each night can trust Williams now with telling us the truth about what he is reporting from the anchor’s chair.

What’s more, his apology has seemed somewhat muted, as he’s sought to wrap himself in the flag. Consider this from USA Today: “On air Wednesday night, Williams said he had ‘made a mistake in recalling the events of 12 years ago,’ that the whole incident was simply ‘a bungled attempt by me to thank one special veteran and by extension our brave military men and women, veterans everywhere, those who have served everywhere while I did not.'”

From where I am sitting, that looks and sound a bit like spin.

NBC’s main anchorman is facing a steep climb back to respectability.

 

Crusades, slavery … in the name of Christianity?

Barack Obama cannot possibly have a tin ear to the prevailing attitude among his harshest critics.

Can he?

The president stood before the National Prayer Breakfast audience Thursday and managed to offend Christians by invoking the memory of the Crusades and ol’ Jim Crow laws in scolding those who contend that Islam is the only great religion that produces horrible acts against humanity.

Not true, the president said. The Crusades and slavery were carried out — in the minds of many — in the name of Jesus Christ.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/critics-pounce-after-obama-talks-crusades-slavery-at-prayer-breakfast/ar-AA92xT8

Let’s understand something: President Obama spoke the harsh truth about the Crusades and U.S. laws that placed Americans in bondage.

He said: “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

His comments enraged some Republicans. According to the Washington Post: “’The president’s comments this morning at the prayer breakfast are the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime,’ said former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore (R). ‘He has offended every believing Christian in the United States. This goes further to the point that Mr. Obama does not believe in America or the values we all share.’”

Have we gotten over-sensitized to hearing such harsh scolding from our politicians? I’m beginning to think that’s the case. The late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy used to admonish Americans for not exhibiting more understanding and compassion toward others and he, too, enraged critics by speaking words not everyone wanted to hear.

Barack Obama’s own Christian faith ought to give him some license to tell the truth the way he sees it.

That, of course, won’t sell to those who continue to insist he has “Muslim sympathies,” or even that he’s actually a “closet Muslim.” He has proclaimed his faith in Jesus Christ more times than I can remember, but that won’t quell the critics this time.

Then again, the Constitution of the United States declares there should be no religious litmus test for those seeking public office. But what the heck, that’s another story for another time.

 

Obama 'most admired man' … in the world

What’s going on here?

I thought Barack Obama was the “worst president in U.S. history,” that his policies are bankrupting the country, that he’s a weakling who cannot make up his mind on how to fight terrorism, that he’s an “empty suit” with no vision for anything.

Isn’t that what the right-wing mainstream media have been telling us?

Sure it is.

Now comes a new Gallup Poll that says something quite different. It’s that President Obama is the “most admired man in the world” for the seventh year in a row.

http://aattp.org/gallup-poll-names-obama-most-admired-man-in-the-world-for-the-7th-straight-year/

Man, I don’t get it. The media are filling us with these so-called “truths” about Obama, but the public just ain’t buying it.

Occasionally, U.S. presidents get supplanted as the “most admired” person. It’s been the pope on occasion. Lyndon Johnson didn’t fare too well during the Vietnam War, nor did Richard Nixon do well in the poll as Watergate began to boil over.

Barack Obama? Well, he seems to enjoy fairly high standing among citizens of the world — which I’m assuming includes Americans who keep telling the right-wing media that the president is doing a lousy job.

Stand tall, Mr. President.

 

Jefferson, Madison … and Bill Press?

Who does Bill Press think he is?

The one-time CNN news commentator and Democratic Party “strategist” posted a Facebook message today in which he blasted the idea behind the National Prayer Breakfast. He called it a right-wing attempt to blur the line between church and state.

“The last thing I want to see is Republicans and Democrats saying how much they believe in the Bible,” Press said with an apparent scorn on his face.

He said President Obama has been “suckered” into attending the annual event.

Holy mackerel, Bill. You need to take a deep breath.

Presidents who attend these events always are careful to maintain a certain ecumenical air about their remarks. The National Prayer Breakfast is open to people of all faiths and the prayers recited are universal in nature, given that they aren’t Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Shinto or Buddhist in nature.

That’s the spirit of the Constitution that participants seek to preserve at this event.

The most hilarious part of Press’s screed against the Prayer Breakfast was this: “Thomas Jefferson and James Madison would never attend the National Prayer Breakfast. And neither will Bill Press.”

OK, not only did this clown place himself side by side — symbolically — with two of the greatest Americans who ever lived, he referred to himself in the third person. I can’t decide which of those things is more offensive.

Knock it off, Press.

Note: Here’s Press’s Facebook post.

PARTING SHOT

OK, I know what you’re thinking: Bill, why are you on the air today? Why aren’t you at the National Prayer Breakfast with President Obama and the Dalai Lama?

Are you kidding? I’ve been in Washington 15 years now. I’ve been invited to the National Prayer Breakfast every year. And I’ve never gone – and never will.

In fact, I hate the National Prayer Breakfast. Because I think it’s nothing but a right-wing attempt to tear down the wall of separation between church and state, which too many Democrats – including President Obama – get suckered into.

The last thing I want to see are Republicans and Democrats standing up and telling everybody how much they believe in the Bible. I don’t care whether they believe in the Bible.

I want to see Republicans and Democrats standing up and telling us how much they believe in the Constitution. And I want to see Republicans hiding behind the Bible to try to undermine the Constitution – like they did on slavery yesterday, and like they do on gay rights today.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison would never attend the National Prayer Breakfast. And neither will Bill Press.

That’s my parting shot for today. I’m Bill Press.

GOP gangs up on Ted Cruz … good deal!

Ted Cruz keeps trying to rouse the U.S. Senate rabbles with his obstructionism.

But now the freshman Texas Republican lawmaker is finding trouble in a most unlikely place: within his own GOP Senate caucus.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/loretta-lynch-vote-ted-cruz-114921.html?ml=po

The fiery loudmouth wants to employ procedural trickery to delay the Senate Judiciary Committee vote on attorney general-designate Loretta Lynch’s nomination to take over the Justice Department. Why? Because he just cannot stand the fact that she supports the president’s executive actions on immigration reform. Who knew?

That she would endorse President Obama’s executive authority just isn’t possible, right?

Oh, wait! Lynch is Barack Obama’s choice to be attorney general. Gosh, do you think she’s on the same page as the president of the United States on this contentious issue?

None of that matters, of course, to the Cruz Missile.

He’s going to do whatever he can to disrupt, dismiss and just plain dis the president whenever possible.

Fellow Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn also opposes Lynch’s nomination, but he doesn’t want to block her confirmation vote from proceeding. Indeed, Lynch already has gathered considerable Republican support for her nomination, including from serious conservatives such as Orrin Hatch of Utah, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Jeff Flake of Arizona.

Cruz should look at it this way, as well. Every day that Lynch is denied the nomination on the basis of some specious procedural chicanery is a day longer that Eric Holder remains as attorney general. After all, Senate Republicans are known to detest Holder more than they oppose Lynch.

Eric Holder did a good job as attorney general — and Loretta Lynch deserves confirmation and she needs to get to work.

 

So much for 'trust'

My trick knee is throbbing once again.

This time it’s telling me NBC News anchor Brian Williams has some more explaining to do about a made-up story that got him some seriously happy — and falsely premised — publicity over the weekend.

You see, it turns that Williams erred in recounting a story that he had been aboard a Chinook helicopter that had been hit by enemy rocket fire in Iraq in 2003. He had befriended an Army command sergeant major, Tim Terpak, who — according to Williams — had provided cover for the anchorman and other passengers aboard the downed helicopter.

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/nbc-s-brian-williams-recants-iraq-story-after-soldiers-protest-1.327792

Williams and Terpak went to a New York Rangers hockey game the other evening and both of them stood and accepted the crowd’s applause as the public address announcer revealed the story about Terpak’s heroism in protecting the passengers and crew, which allegedly included Williams.

It now turns out Williams wasn’t there.

This is a serious smirch on Williams’s reputation as a veteran TV journalist who trades on the “trust” he has built with the viewers of his nightly newscast.

Williams has recanted the story, apologized and said he “misremembered” the events of that day. He actually had arrived about 60 minutes after the chopper was shot down.

Misremembered? For a dozen years?

The anchorman came clean only after other soldiers who were there protested, telling others they had no memory of Williams being present when Terpak — who’s since retired from the Army — engineered the getaway of those aboard the Chinook.

“I would not have chosen to make this mistake,” Williams said. “I don’t know what screwed up in my mind that caused me to conflate one aircraft with another.”

Neither does anyone else.

 

Not quite so gracious a concession?

I hope now we’ll hear from Mitt Romney and hear his version of the phone call he made to President Obama the night he lost the 2012 presidential election.

Why? Because a new book by the president’s one-time senior political adviser paints a fairly dubious picture of the call the losing candidate made to the winner.

David Axelrod’s book, “Believer: My 40 Years in Politics,” tells of Romney telling Obama that the president did a good job of turning out the vote in places like Cleveland and Milwaukee. The president took that to mean “black people,” according to Axelrod.

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/04/black_people_thats_what_he_thinks_this_was_all_about_how_romneys_2012_concession_irked_obama/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

So, there you have it. The president was re-elected by 5 million votes because African-Americans turned out en masse to put their guy over the top?

Let’s assume for a moment that Axelrod has it right, that Obama was “unsmiling” during his brief conversation with Romney.

The president then went on national television to declare victory. He said the following: “We may have battled fiercely, but it’s only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future. From George to Lenore to their son Mitt, the Romney family has chosen to give back to America through public service and that is the legacy that we honor and applaud tonight.”

Well, Mitt, did you really and truly frame your “congratulatory phone call” in that light?

 

Americans love freedom, but …

A growing battle over mandatory vaccinations for public school children is turning into a culture war of sorts.

Libertarian-leaning Republicans suggest that requiring vaccinations against communicable diseases impinges on parental rights to choose whether their children should be vaccinated. The main medical enemy is measles.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-pauls-and-mr-christies-irresponsible-comments-about-measles-vaccinations/2015/02/03/b269c9da-abc1-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html

Have those who contend the issue is choice actually considered some of the consequences of their request for greater latitude on this matter?

The Washington Post editorial takes aim at U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., for their irresponsible comments regarding vaccinations.

They both should know better than to mutter what they’ve said about the subject.

Especially, Dr. Paul, an ophthalmologist by training. As a medical doctor, he ought to be acutely sensitive to the value of vaccines as guardians of the public health. But he isn’t. He’s instead a politician pandering to one of the bases of his party in his budding quest to win the Republican Party nomination for president of the United States in 2016.

As the Post opined: “Both the governor and senator seem to be suggesting that it is fine for parents to avoid vaccinations for their children. But is this really a matter of individual rights? Liberty does not confer the right to endanger others — whether at a school or Disneyland or anywhere else.”

Measles cases are on the increase, endangering children and those who come in contact with them. Protecting the public health ought to be one of those areas where government involvement shouldn’t be challenged.

Sadly, it is being challenged by politicians who should know better.

 

Who are you calling ‘crazy,’ Rep. Hastings?

It’s one thing to be called “crazy” by someone whose very presence commands respect and dignity.

It’s quite another to be labeled as such by someone who, shall we say, has a bit of a checkered past himself.

All that said, it’s bizarre to the max to see such an eruption of anger at a congressional rules panel hearing between Republican and Democratic members of Congress, the people’s representatives in the government of the world’s most powerful nation.

U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., called Texas a “crazy” state and said he wouldn’t live here “for all the tea in China.”

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2015/02/crazy-texas-republicans-to-alcee-hastings-dont-mess-with-texas/

Hastings made the crack during a House Rules Committee hearing on the Affordable Care Act and whether Texas would participate in its implementation.

His remark drew a sharp rebuke from Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, who said Hastings had “defamed” the great state of Texas. I wouldn’t go quite that far, but the remark seemed a bit of a diversion from the issue at hand.

I won’t get into defending the state where my family and I have lived for the past 31 years — except to say this: Yes, the politics here aren’t quite to my liking, but the state is chock full of decent, hard-working, caring, compassionate folks who don’t nearly fit the stereotype that many Americans attach to Texans.

The sunrises and sunsets ain’t bad, either.

As for Hastings, I just wish he wouldn’t have brought up that crazy talk.

This individual once sat on the federal bench. President Carter appointed him to be a U.S. District Court judge — and then he got himself impeached on perjury and bribery charges by a Democratically controlled House of Representatives. The vote was 413-3. How did he fare in a Senate trial? Senators convicted him and he got tossed out of office.

Never fear. Congress welcomed him in 1993 when he won election.

So, let’s stop throwing “crazy” talk around out there, Rep. Hastings. Shall we?