Daily Kos

View Story | 44 comments

  •  asd (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    JohnGor0, MO Blue

    while Gore doesn't have a thick Teflon coating, I think you are underestimating exactly what the media to Gore for over 2 years actually.

    February 1, 2000
    Al Gore v. the Media

    By Robert Parry

    To read the major newspapers and to watch the TV pundit shows, one can't avoid the impression that many in the national press corps have decided that Vice President Al Gore is unfit to be elected the next president of the United States.

    Across the board -- from The Washington Post to The Washington Times, from The New York Times to the New York Post, from NBC's cable networks to the traveling campaign press corps -- journalists don't even bother to disguise their contempt for Gore anymore.

    At one early Democratic debate, a gathering of about 300 reporters in a nearby press room hissed and hooted at Gore's answers. Meanwhile, every perceived Gore misstep, including his choice of clothing, is treated as a new excuse to put him on a psychiatrist's couch and find him wanting.

    Journalists freely call him "delusional," "a liar" and "Zelig." Yet, to back up these sweeping denunciations, the media has relied on a series of distorted quotes and tendentious interpretations of his words, at times following scripts written by the national Republican leadership.

    In December, for instance, the news media generated dozens of stories about Gore's supposed claim that he discovered the Love Canal toxic waste dump. "I was the one that started it all," he was quoted as saying. This "gaffe" then was used to recycle other situations in which Gore allegedly exaggerated his role or, as some writers put it, told "bold-faced lies."

    But behind these examples of Gore's "lies" was some very sloppy journalism. The Love Canal flap started when The Washington Post and The New York Times misquoted Gore on a key point and cropped out the context of another sentence to give readers a false impression of what he meant.

    The error was then exploited by national Republicans and amplified endlessly by the rest of the news media, even after the Post and Times grudgingly filed corrections.

    Comparatively, Kerry did NOT get bad media treatment until after the SBVT attacks surfaced, and even after that it was his fault for not coming out and denying the charges immediately and providing the netroots material to fight back with.

    McCain & Clinton = WAR Authorizers | Veep prefs for Obama: 1. Sebelius 2. Richardson

    by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Dec 11, 2006 at 09:13:26 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  needless to say, (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      JohnGor0, john07801

      the netroots didn't exist in 2000 to aid Gore in fighting the systemmatic, relentless, widespread and grotesque smearing.

      McCain & Clinton = WAR Authorizers | Veep prefs for Obama: 1. Sebelius 2. Richardson

      by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Dec 11, 2006 at 09:14:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  My thoughts (0+ / 0-)

      The Wise Men of Washington felt that Gore was a traitor who had sided with that hick Arkansas governor against "his people" from Washington. He was born and raised there and should have helped the Washington establishment string up Clinton. When he didn't, they decided there should be no mercy for the "traitor," who had helped  "trash Washington" as many in D.C. believed Clinton had.

View Story | 44 comments