Skip to main content

...I saw this earlier on CNN, but I waited until the transcript was available so I would have the full quote. Judy Woodruff interviewed Senator Robert Bird today for "Inside Politics". The Republicans have signaled that they want to tie Byrd's connection to MOVEON, saying that he's out of the mainstream in West Virginia.

Byrd said this when he was asked about whether he'll run next year...

WOODRUFF: ...Senator. Are you running for re- election?

BYRD: Well, I'm not going to announce it today. I'm thinking about it, seriously.

WOODRUFF: What are you leaning toward?

BYRD: Taking care of the issues here. I'm leaning toward defeating this opening of Pandora's box, cutting off the filibuster.


Sort of a non-answer, but I would guess that he's running, but the part I loved about the interview was when Woodruff basically repeated Republican talking points to Byrd, and he told her what's wrong with her & the company she works for...

WOODRUFF: Well, let me ask you this, there are Democrats on the more moderate end who say that the vocal, the most vocal elements of the party are the liberal groups like MoveOn, and they say it's not good for the party. Is that something you're concerned with?

BYRD: You know, I pay no attention to the talk about labels. What I'm concerned about is the liberties of the people of this country. The liberty to speak out, to say what they think, and not be intimidated. That's one thing that's happening in this political atmosphere these days.

And I have to say there's too much of the effort to intimidate. There's an effort to intimidate those who speak out, who are critical of the administration, who are critical of the president.

They try to intimidate, intimidate the media. That's a good one. They've got you intimidated.

Intimidate senators who have the backbone to stand up for the rights of the people they represent, they try to intimidate. They try to -- now they're trying to intimidate the courts. Back off.

WOODRUFF: Well, I certainly don't believe they have me intimidated or my news organization intimidated.

BYRD: I don't think so. But look back at debate on the war.

Where was it? The Senate was mute. The media didn't ask questions, and the people didn't ask questions. We were mute.

People were intimidated. That's the effort now, is to intimidate anybody who has this common sense, and the courage and a strong feeling of what's right and what's wrong, trying to intimidate them. They're trying to do that to me.


...It will probably fall on deaf ears, but it was nice to hear someone say it to one of them.

Originally posted to 医生的宫殿 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 03:28 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Not intimidated, bought and paid for (4.00)
    WOODRUFF: Well, I certainly don't believe they have me intimidated or my news organization intimidated.

    Intimidation would imply that she and CNN fall in line with the Republican talking points because of fear or threats, rather than because of money.

    So I guess we can't call it "intimidation," right, Judy?

    •  Woodroof is one of the media whore (4.00)
      She is one of the biggest media whore out there. Of course she won't admit it.

      As if.

      •  Isn't she the one (3.96)
        Kerry smacked down about a month ago about repeat presidential nominees? That was pretty awesome. I love seeing the media called on their crappiness. Byrd is great, I feel like it's a priviledge to hear him every time he opens his mouth. They don't make Senators like that anymore.

        "Take back the new millenium!" - Dan Bern

        by iambaytor on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:13:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes they do (3.95)
          the people just don't elect them anymore.
          •  Sad but true (none)
            Now we get thugs instead of statesman. Sigh.

            "Take back the new millenium!" - Dan Bern

            by iambaytor on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 12:02:05 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  But if (none)
            The people don't elect them, then by definition they're not being "made into Senators." I think the original point stands.
          •  or they die (4.00)
            in mysterious plane crashes.
            •  not only is the plane crash mysterious... (4.00)
              ...but the whole FBI recovery effort too.  Check this out.  According to a UofM Duluth professor (and JFK assassination expert) Jim Fetzer, the FBI team arrived on the crash scene so quickly that they would have had to have left their twin cities headquarters at about the same time the plane took off.  That's how far from the local FBI headquarters the crash was.  What's that? You media outlet of choice didn't investigate this angle of the story?  Wow, what a surprise.  Funny how that seems to happen a lot with convenient "accidents" or "terrorist acts".  The FBI shows up, takes complete control of the investigation, and a virtual information blackout unfolds except the official story line that the cause was purely an accident/terrorist act/senseless tragedy/etc.   But, of course, the idea that elements of the FBI, CIA, military, or any other agency that we are forced to trust could be as corrupted as the politicians we repeatedly elect is just too unspeakable to be taken seriously.  I guess that's why no one likes to talk about the 911       wargames, including a CIA-run simulated plane crash into a building on that day.  Well, no one except Rep. McKinney.  Watch the video at the bottom of the page.  I hope she avoids the small, crash-prone planes.    
        •  What did he say to her? (none)
          •  She was badgering him (4.00)
            about 2008 and told him they had done some research and found that no losing presidential nominee had been renominated since something like the late 1800s (I can't remeber exactly who it was at the moment). Kerry just kind of gave her a look somewhere between "I can't believe you just said that" and "bitch, please" and he politely but pointedly pointed out the Nixon had done exactly that after losing in 1960. She then had to cover her ass by adding that she had meant to say being renominated four years later. Kerry's response was basically that he wasn't going to let history dictate his actions but he's focused on 2006 for now. There was a video somewhere, it's worth watching, I was lucky enough to catch this on a break at work.

            Poor Kerry, I think he's starting to get really tired of being asked about 2008, how many times can the man give the same response without his head exploding?

            "Take back the new millenium!" - Dan Bern

            by iambaytor on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 11:57:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Exactly the right response (4.00)
              I think it's long past time that professional politicians begin to give these media types the 'who the fuck do you think you are?' treatment.  They deserve it, and a little slapping around probably might do them some good.  It would certainly do ms Woodroff some good.

              You don't see sports reporters getting away with this sort of stuff when they talk with professional coaches.

            •  She is no spring chicken... (none)
              and should have recalled Adlai Steveson's back-to-back losses to Ike in the 50s.  Not only a sorry journalist but obviously defective mentally.

              Please visit my webby, www.stumpysfindings.com. A friend said, "I feel like I've entered a slick modern museum of cool stuff."

              by stumpy on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 06:53:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Oh yeah (none)
                that too. I'm not that familiar with Ike's presidency but Kerry didn't mention that part. I found the transcript and she said it was Grover Cleveland. Um, it's really disgusting that the host of a show called "Inside Politics" doesn't seem to know the history of politics in the US. Here is the transcript on cnn.com, they don't seem to have the video anymore. Too bad, the exchange was something that should be watched, it was a thing of beauty.

                "Take back the new millenium!" - Dan Bern

                by iambaytor on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 01:39:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  There is Adlai Stevenson. (none)
              Adlai Stevenson was nominated twice in row against Eisenhower.
        •  Yes, I loved that moment (none)
          Then she took a snippy tone as if it was his fault that she had gotten the facts screwed up. She definitely didn't come off looking too good.

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Kerry2008/

          by Noisy Democrat on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 01:07:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I agree. (3.91)
        She's as craven as they come.  All of her mealy-mouthed, condescending put-downs of the Dems last year during the Kerry campaign stand out in my mind as a particularly low point in journalism.  

        At least Fox is overt about it.  With Woodruff, Blitzer et al., it is somehow worse... I dunno...

        Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

        by Dale on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:58:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  An apt ditty from our transatlantic cousins (4.00)
      You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
      Thank God! the British journalist.
      But, seeing what the man will do
      Unbribed, there's no occasion to.

      "Folly is wont to have more followers and comrades than discretion." -Cervantes-

      by Don Quixote on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:06:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Guess it's back to the (none)
      same old same old.

      Lieberman-Brazille.  Lieberman-Brazille.  Lieberman-Brazille.

    •  the history of our media's corruption... (none)
      ...is rarely told.  It's a shame.  Without an honest media we can't even begin to fix everything else that's going wrong in our country.  Here's a couple interesting links regarding the infiltration of the major media outlets by the various intelligence agencies.  Considering propaganda is one of the most powerful tools of control in existence, it makes sense that the corrupted factions of the CIA (which would definately include the appointed folks at the top) would LOVE to have assets all over the media.  Here's a couple of interesting links about that:
      Journalism And The CIA: The Mighty Wurlitzer

      ABC and the rise of Rush Limbaugh

  •  She was obedient to the script (4.00)
    What, is she going to say "Yes, everyone here is intimidated and we are sticking to the narrative we are handed."?

    Imagine if she had.

    •  Or (none)
      She could just apologize for towing the line for the Repugs and corporate media.

      Signature goes here.

      by lalawguy on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 03:30:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  grammar carping (3.75)
        "Toeing the line", not "towing".

        "Some prices are just too high...The one thing you can't trade for your heart's desire is your heart." Lois McMaster Bujold

        by lahke on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:29:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh yeah (none)
          That makes me want to scream every time I see it. And due to the way things are, I see it so much more often these days!

          Maybe I will do a post on it, With a little cartoon illustrating the difference.

          "Don't be a janitor on the Death Star!" - Grey Lady Bast (change @ for AT to email)

          by bellatrys on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:41:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A funny Civil War Prison Camp 'toon? (none)
            I gotta see it. ;-)

            Might and Right are always fighting In our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning. Might can hardly keep from grinning. -Clarence D

            by Myrkury on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:02:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  There's gotta be a way (none)
              to get across the idea of the difference between "towing" (as in barges, bales, etc) and "toeing" just as there is more than one meaning of the word "line" even tho' there's but one spelling of it.

              I mean, since there's no ZAP key on my keyboard that I can press to send a small electrical shock across the lines to the miscreants who keep making it over and over and over and over again...

              "Don't be a janitor on the Death Star!" - Grey Lady Bast (change @ for AT to email)

              by bellatrys on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:18:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  While you "due" that, (4.00)
            I'll seize this opportunity to point out the difference between due to and because of, to wit:

            We couldn't eat outdoors because of the rain.

            The cancellation of our picnic was due to the rain.

            A good rule of thumb: If you can't substitute attributable for due, use because of instead.

            (Hey, one good usage snark deserves another...)

            Let me state emphatically that we in the Bush administration do NOT condone torture. We sidle up to it, wink at it, and climb into bed with it.

            by turbonium on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:23:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I don't mind such malapropisms (none)
            When I see that one, I see a flea-bitten Percheron towing a greasy barge along a festering canal in the incest-pedophile-Bible-belt hinterlands, and you know what? Works for me!
        •  speaking of grammar and such... (none)
          commas and periods always go inside the quotation marks. Exclamation and question marks only go inside the quotation marks if the quoted material actually included it.

          Examples:

          • "I bought a dog."
          • "I bought a dog," he said.
          • He asked, "Did I buy a dog?"
          • What is this thing you call a "dog"?

          and so on.

          Note that if you bought "Eats, Shoots & Leaves," it does NOT follow this rule, because outside of America, they apparently put the commas and period wherever the heck they want. The author even makes note of that in the preface.

          "I told them on Inauguration Day. I said look into my eyes: no new enhancements." - President Johnny Gentle (Famous Crooner)

          by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 09:43:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  while this is true - and was beaten into me... (none)
            ... by nuns in grade school and priests at Jesuit High School, 99% of the time I refuse to follow that stupid rule re commas inside the quotes. It never made sense then, and "it makes no sense today", which I why I refuse to comply. The 1% of the time when I will (sigh..) comply, is in formal letters. Because then the format prudes would ding you for not knowing the rules.

            I know the rule and think it's visually stupid and impedes meaning.

            speaking of grammar and such... (none / 0)

            commas and periods always go inside the quotation marks. Exclamation and question marks only go inside the quotation marks if the quoted material actually included it.

            Examples:

                * "I bought a dog."
                * "I bought a dog," he said.
                * He asked, "Did I buy a dog?"
                * What is this thing you call a "dog"?

            and so on.

            Note that if you bought "Eats, Shoots & Leaves," it does NOT follow this rule, because outside of America, they apparently put the commas and period wherever the heck they want. The author even makes note of that in the preface.

            That I didn't know. Three cheers for people who refuse to continue and arcane and never-properly-justified rule.

            The nuns would have a shit-fit if they heard me urging non-compliance. Sister Marcella always carried around a yardstick and would smack kids on the hands if they were non-compliant about anything in class.  "O. B. E. Y." SLAP!!, "O. B. E. Y." ... By the way, you also got slapped if she came around with the collection box for donations to "The Missions" and you said "I don't have any change, Sister".  <----- Note the period, where it wants to be, OUTSIDE of the unit called a "quote". <----- "There you go again".  <--- And again.

        •  Some peeple learnt verbally (4.00)
          And having an oral fixation to your grammer doesn't mean you are more stupider than them that learnt by reading letters n'shit.
        •  Good to see someone honing in on the bad grammar. (none)
          Because it needs to be sharpened. On the other hand, if more people would hone their grammar skills, we could home in on the rampant misuse of certain words.

          Go Lieberman! Please. Anywhere, just go.

          by AWhitneyBrown on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 10:37:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  There's a book... (none)
          ....that anyone who writes expecting to be read should own:

          When Words Collide: A Media Writer's Guide to Grammar and Style

          It makes writing fun and easy.

          ... there never was a revolution unless there were some oppressive and intolerable conditions against which to revolute. -- Twain

          by FemiNazi on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 12:24:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Toeing and Towing (none)
          The thing is, both figures of speech make sense, even though "towing" is at heart a mis-hearing of the expression.  If the media is toeing the Republican line, they're standing behind it and carefully refusing to cross.  But if they're towing the Republican line, they're dragging it along and trying to hook more people.

          (My favorite example of something similar is sports announcers who comment on a slumping player:  some say he has to get "on track," and some say he has to get "untracked."  I guess it depends on your opinion of the track; is it a route or a rut?)

          •  Exactly... (none)
            That is why I have always spelled the phrase in this context with "tow." Words form pictures in my head. When a news corporation recites Republican talking point, it is trying to influence its viewers and sponsors to follow suit.

            Signature goes here.

            by lalawguy on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 09:36:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  and blow her cover ??? (none)
        CNN might have to start proclaiming that they're "fair and balanced" ...

        and then FOX would sue for copyright ...

        and then the Judge would laugh FOX out of Court AGAIN ...

        you can see the problems that would create

        hey look, CNN went "butt up" for Bush, aint that a surprise

  •  In a way, Woodruff is right. (3.97)
    She is one of the folks actively DOING the intimidating, with belittling rhetoric, etc. , so it is true that she is not one of the ones who IS 'intimidated'.

    Judy Woodruff saying she doesn't feel intimidated by the Right Wing is like Josef Goebbels saying he doesn't feel intimidated by the Nazis.

    •  We need to clean our own house too (4.00)
      Parent poster:
      [Judy Woodruff] is one of the folks actively DOING the intimidating, with belittling rhetoric, etc

      Senator Byrd:

      And I have to say there's too much of the effort to intimidate. There's an effort to intimidate those who speak out, who are critical of the administration, who are critical of the president.

      A prominent Kossack, talking physically intimidating a commentator who has been solidly against the Iraq War:

      [Drenching Pat Buchanan with salad dressing when he's speaking to a public forum l]ooks foolish the first few times, but once the assholes like Coulter and O'Reilly and Buchanan and Scarborough and Hannity (I'll stop -- the fucking list is too long) begin declining invitations to speak for fear of salad dressing and pies, it will have succeeded.

      A Kossack who thinks free speech goes too far:

      Randall Terry should be tried and imprisoned... if not executed.[...] Randall Terry, through his statements inciting the overthrow of the United States government, is I think plainly guilty of one and possibly guilty of two other federal crimes.

      Let's not just parrot senator's Byrd's words, let's really listen to what he's saying, and let's clean our own house too.

      Being able to speak without fear isn't just for Democrats or people we agree with; it's for all Americans.

      When we forget that, we forget why we're here.

      Accountability moment, my ass!

      by orthogonal on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 09:42:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  with all due respect to your good intentions (4.00)
        while there is no excuse in my mind for the comments you quoted, holding up a few random off-the-reservation comments of a few dKos poster to the Woodruff's complicity in the pervasive media deception so typified by CNN is not a valid comparison, imho.
        •  But the reminder needed to be made (none)
          holding up a few random off-the-reservation comments of a few dKos poster to the Woodruff's complicity in the pervasive media deception so typified by CNN is not a valid comparison, imho.

          Not a valid comparison of what? That's always the question you have to ask, what's being compared?

          You're right that the pervasiveness doesn't compare, but that wasn't what I was comparing.

          In this case I was comparing "intimidation". My point was that if we consider mere words on Woodruff's part to be "intimidation", then physical violence and talk of execution certainly is also "intimidation".

          My larger point is that we must always be careful to remember where we come from, and why we're here. We're not here just to defeat the Right any way we can -- we're here to uphold core American values like freedom of speech.

          We're not here just to win seats for anybody who calls himself a Democrat, regardless of his values. We're here to see that the truly Liberal values -- which are also traditional American values -- are cherished and preserved and passed to the next generation of Americans.

          We're not here to win at any cost, and certainly not at the cost of freedom of speech. Part of makes us what we are is that we not only know that Pat Buchanan has the same free speech rights as any of us, but that we stand up and fight for Pat's right to speak, even if what he says turns our stomachs.

          That's what we stand for as proud Liberals, and when the battle has become so trying that we begin to forget the very vbalues that impelled us to fight that battle, we need to remind ourselves of who we are.

          I didn't make my comment to hector or criticize the Kossacks who momentarily forgot the values that brought them here -- I did it to remind them of their better angels, so that they wouldn't lose their liberal "souls" in their zeal to score an easy "win" against our opponents.

          Accountability moment, my ass!

          by orthogonal on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 12:54:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  You certainly are a craven sack of garbage (4.00)
        After posting your misinformed and idiotic critique of my diary on the thread there, you refused to defend it again there, instead electing to smear me (and Maryscott O'Connor) here.  

        Let me break it down for you, using the smallest words I can, for clarity's sake:  the word "conquer" means to overthrow by force or violence.  So when Randall Terry tells a group of wingnuts that it is their "biblical duty...to conquer this country," he is publishing an incitement to the violent overthrow of the US government, something prohibited by at least two separate statutes.  His utterance is not "free speech."  If you disagree with that, then you either don't speak English, or you disagree with every Supreme Court case that has ever considered the issue, as well as every legal commentator of whom I'm aware.  And when you defend Randall Terry, you're defending a man who's supposed "free speech" has already incited others to take innocent lives at abortion clinics around the country.  

        It's Terry who wants to do the intimidating, not me, and not the people who throw a few pies.  So do everyone a favor and take your heavy-handed sanctimony elsewhere.

        The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. --George Bernard Shaw

        by Categorically Imperative on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 12:59:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Follow the money. (4.00)
    Next time you see an ad for Boeing on CNN (and there's a lot of them), ask yourself, "what do they want me to buy?"

    This is the real scam of the MSM right now, is government friendly corporations buying huge ad-buys in the MSM which hinge upon the given network of cable outlet not talking out of turn.

    There's simply no possible reason for Boeing to need to advertise to me. I'm not buying a plane any time soon, and nor is anyone I know. So why are they spending all that money on CNN ads?

    I'll tell you.. Influence.

    •  Corporate Awareness Adds (4.00)
      Corporations that don't sell directly to consumers advertise to them for various reasons. A classic example is so you might want to invest in their stock. (investor relations). Building a "brand"... maybe if you are choosing a flight you might pick the one that is using the new 777 because you heard the seat layout is better on United than the Airbus.

      A classic example of this is BASF with their "We don't make things. We make the things that make them better" or some such campaign.

      Sure lots do this so that we all may like them. That way when the shit hits the fan like it did recently with the Boeing tanker deal or in the past with the ADM price fixing thing they might have some positive goodwill out there.

    •  well there must be (none)
      some commercials relevant to the rich who got richer.

      "....a relative newbie (user ID in the 18,000 range).. "

      by Miss Devore on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:07:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's not the aircraft (4.00)
      The product being sold is the viewer.

      "Folly is wont to have more followers and comrades than discretion." -Cervantes-

      by Don Quixote on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:12:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I just love feisty old senators (4.00)
    who don't take no shit.

    A society of sheep must beget in time a government of wolves. Bertrand de Jouvenel

    by Little Red Hen on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 03:47:53 PM PDT

  •  hah (4.00)
    Reporters aren't supposed to insert themselves into the story.  It would have been easy for a bigger dickhead than Byrd to make the rest of the interview about Woodruff.  I'm not a reporter so I don't know what sort of training you get for Woodruff's job, but I'd imagine that sort of lesson would get pretty ingrained by the time you reach her level.  'Byrd alleges media intimidation' would make a decent headline.  'Woodruff denies media intimidation,' not so much so.  At least from CNN's perspective.  

    If I'm right then Byrd pushed her far enough on the defensive to forget some pretty basic elements of reportage.  Interesting.  

    Tom DeLay's GOP: cheating America in a time of war.

    by Tom Frank on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:03:15 PM PDT

  •  Not intimidated? Bullshit. Two words Judy... (4.00)
    ..."Eason Jordan."
  •  Nice headline, but (none)
    it's wrong if your quote is correct.

    WOODRUFF: Well, I certainly don't believe they have me intimidated or my news organization intimidated.

    BYRD: I don't think so. But look back at debate on the war.

    I read that as he agrees with her; he does not believe she's been intimidated specifically, although he does believe the media as a whole should have asked more questions about the war.

    •  It makes sense (none)
      if you take it to mean "I don't think you do believe they have you intimidated."  In the "Of yourse you'll deny it" or "Of course, you're too close to see it" sense.

      Or he could have meant she's not intimidated right now, but intimidation has certainly shaped some of her reporting.

      But he does pretty clearly say he thinks she's been intimidated.

    •  Agreed (4.00)
      I think it was kind of a lukewarm debunking of the RWCM. The "you" was more of a general "the media" kind of you, and then he backed off when the individual to whom he was talking disagreed.

      The fact is, she most definitely is NOT intimidated. If she and her fellow media friends were intimidated, it would imply that they knew what was right and wanted to say it, but were bullied into remaining silent.

      Bullied? Hell, they're willing participants. Does anyone have any faith at all that these idiots actually recognize what's right? That they actually yearn to say anything other than the regurgitated talking points they spew non-stop? Don't think so.

      "I told them on Inauguration Day. I said look into my eyes: no new enhancements." - President Johnny Gentle (Famous Crooner)

      by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:36:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  here's why I disagree (none)
        Judy could have steered that comment into something interesting and potentially newsworthy.  Who does Senator Byrd think is doing the intimidating?  Does he trust the news media less as a result?  It seems awfully egocentric for Judy to make Byrd's comment about her, personally, when he was clearly referring to her network and the aggregate of personalities in it.  

        You might expect Tucker Carlson or Jim Carville to respond like that, but Judy surprised me.  What the hell, maybe I'm making too much out of it.  

        Tom DeLay's GOP: cheating America in a time of war.

        by Tom Frank on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:01:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  hm...doesn't that mean we agree? :) (none)

          "I told them on Inauguration Day. I said look into my eyes: no new enhancements." - President Johnny Gentle (Famous Crooner)

          by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:21:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  yepper..wait, noper...wait... (none)
            My tinfoil hat might be screwed on a bit tighter than yours.  On the basic idea that CNN has gradually gone over to the pod people, yes.  The difference might be that I think that the longer-serving and more-professional (that's a relative term, I know) among them might not be too happy about it.  I'm thinking that his comment had enough of a kernel of truth to it that it startled her into saying something unprofessional.  

            But hell, Woodruff could genuinely be so egocentric that she reads every comment about CNN as a comment about her.  Who knows.  

            Tom DeLay's GOP: cheating America in a time of war.

            by Tom Frank on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:53:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Some Are Intimidated. Others Just Well-Paid n/t (none)

        "If Jesus returns, Karl Rove will kill him." (Harvey Wasserman)

        by proudtinfoilhat on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:08:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  no (4.00)
      You ignored the context.  First he says directly, "they've got you intimidated." When she objects, he says, "I don't think so" to be polite.  But he immediately contradicts that polite agreement by saying, "look back at the debate on the war" and goes on to say the media and congress were intimidated.  He concludes by saying the intimidation is still going on.  

      It's hard to imagine he meant to say in that one sentence that he agrees with Judy that she and CNN are excluded from his criticism, dontcha think? Hard to believe.

      "Orthodoxy, of whatever color, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style." --George Orwell

      by markymarx on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:32:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Cheers to Senator Byrd! (3.85)
    Woodruff may be a nice lady, but a strong reporter, she is not.  She doesn't ask tough questions.  She only asks stuff cribbed from talking points.  That's not journalism.  That's laziness.  She's been stuck in D.C. too long, and many of her interviews come across like she's kissing ass.  It's a symptom of a money-driven media, where quality is shoved aside for sensationalistic stenography.

    It's very time-consuming to do an hour show everyday (which is why I always wondered how Dan Rather did the Evening News and 60 Minutes...the half hour show could take all day to write, tape, etc.)

    "Minimize our defensive posture, maximize our offensive posture."--Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL)

    by Newsie8200 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:11:45 PM PDT

    •  Oops...meant to finish the last paragraph with... (4.00)
      It takes a lot of work to put together an hour show, but there's no excuse for not having the cajones to do the research and get more in depth.  

      With MSNBC and FNC, HLN, and CNBC all noise, no substance, there's an opening for one of the cable news networks to go for quality and substance.  There's still an audience that appreciates that.  

      "Minimize our defensive posture, maximize our offensive posture."--Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL)

      by Newsie8200 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:13:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is what Kos and other have been ... (4.00)
    ...taking about.

    The RWCM takes the shit from the DLC, TNR's editors, and Lieberman, and then they bash Dems with it.

    And it's silly to boot:  "Liberals should be quiet and submissive and roll over, just like the them."  Well the reason why there is a Moveon, is because of the void left by the DLC types who won't attack the goopers.

  •  An American Hero (4.00)
    Robert Byrd is an American Hero.  Judy Woodruff is a bought and paid for whore.  CNN's decline is truly sickening.
    •  did you ever see Ted Turner interviewed... (none)
      ... by Charlie Rose?  (btw, pre-Iraq invasion I actually liked Charlie a lot, and thought he asked thoughtful questions. but i have no idea how he collapsed, but he's been a right-wing whore himself ever since... Classic is watching Richard Clarke on Charlie Rose re "hair on fire"... There is a look Clarke gives him that in unmistabably " Jesus Christ Charlie, I actually have to spell this out for you? Are you a moron?")

      Anyway, any interview with Ted is colorful, and filled with stuff just blurted out. He doesn't like what CNN turned into.

      •  Ted Turner (none)
        I'd be interested in hearing what he said to Charlie "Big Dumb Guy" Rose.

        More importantly -- time for Ted Turner to give it another go, if he doesn't like what CNN has become.  Start a REAL alternative to Fox News!  (Come on Ted, you have the greenbacks to do it...)

  •  Byrd's comments (4.00)
    It was nice to hear Sen Byrd tell Judy she, and the rest of the media, has been intimidated by the Bush Administration.  I almost laughed out loud when she said she hadn't been intimidated.

    There are only 2 reasons for people to be Republicans; greed and ignorance.

    by Dedhed70 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:34:56 PM PDT

  •  intimidation (4.00)
    THis is a good trope, a very good trope, for Senate Dems and I have little doubt that it'll be repeated. Although "arrogance of power" is a good way to describe the GOP and administration, "they are trying to intimidate us" is even better.

    Senate Dems are standing up for the rights of the American people, and Tom Delay et al are trying to intimidate us.

    If we can get that message out in the upcoming filibuster combustion, I like our chances a lot.

  •  what amazes me... (4.00)
    ...is how the GOP attacks become the story without any kind of media filter. The attack dogs decide, "Hey, let's tie Byrd to MoveOn!" and next think you know, worthless crap like Woodruff is asking, "Why are you tied to MoveOn?"

    Isn't the media supposed to determine for themselves what the story is? Don't they realize how completely inane it is to ask Byrd about MoveOn? If you were an average citizen and knew nothing about the GOP's talking points, I'm sure the last thing you'd ask Byrd about is MoveOn.

    The media is so utterly divorced from reality it's sad. I wish we could pull a Pavlov on them, and start flooding them with "press releases" that John Thune believes kids should eat fast-food or something completely random. Do it enough times, and sure enough, Matthews/Russert/Woodruff/Whoever will ask, "Senator Thune, there are some who say you shouldn't encourage kids to eat fast-food..."

    "I told them on Inauguration Day. I said look into my eyes: no new enhancements." - President Johnny Gentle (Famous Crooner)

    by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:40:19 PM PDT

    •  yeah, why ask him indeed? (none)
      I don't get why they ask questions like that.  I mean do they really think that every Democrat is the member of every allegedly pro-Democrat group and completely aware of what it does and thinks?

      And for all the fuss about MoveOn, nobody except Republicans and a few Leiberman types really has a very strong opinion of them.  I mean realistically it's just another Democrat interest group, not radically different from the AFL-CIO or the Sierra Club.

      All your vote are belong to us

      by Harkov311 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:45:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's just the flip side (3.88)
        Well, you've seen the interviews where they ask Republicans the same stuff, right?  Like when they ask Tom DeLay, "How come you gave a speech to that fundamentalist group last week?  Are you concerned your opponents will paint you as too conservative for America?"

        In case you're wondering what I'm talking about, no, I haven't seen those interviews either.  But it's nice to imagine a world where they exist.

      •  Byrd and MoveOn.org (4.00)
        There actually is a reason that the GOP is trying to make a story out of this.  Last week, Sen. Barack Obama sent an e-mail out to MoveOn.org subscribers asking them to contribute money to Senator Byrd's re-election by April 1 so it would be reflected in his quarterly report to the FEC.  In less than two days, the Obama appeal yielded more than $800,000 for the Byrd campaign.
        •  ah, so the gop'ers are afraid (4.00)
          That with all those small individual contributions -
          Byrd will be emboldened to be even more supportive of the 'special interests' of ordinary americans!

          I bet he got that much because a bunch of people remembered his fiery speeches against going to war in Iraq.

          By god! Byrd is beholden to a bunch of Citizens who donated because they think he's one of the few senators around with the guts to say what they think sound the alarms!

          :)

    •  Moveon.org, you know, (none)
      the extreme-left Internet group that broadcast ads calling Bush Hitler. </RNClie>

      Rove must really hate Moveon; he and his allies in the media are working hard to turn it into the new "liberal," a one-word signal that the Dems are anti-American.

      The Republicans want to cut YOUR Social Security benefits.

      by devtob on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:52:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "...divorced from reality.." (4.00)
      Every time I hear that phrase,do you know who I think of?
  •  Howie Kurtz Syndrome (4.00)
    Of course Kurtz isn;t the only one afflicted with this syndrome, but since he's the best example of it, I'll use him.

    The syndrome is basically caused by fawning all over the people you're supposed to be grilling on an open fire.  The sad truth is, a lot of journalists these days (especially on TV, but also sometimes in print) seem to care more about shaking the hand of some bigwig than in finding the truth.

    This is the Kurtz Syndrome.  Overawed by the power of those he speaks about, he fawns at them, asking lazy questions, ignoring details, and generally acting more like a gossip columnist than a real journalist.  If the media were smarter, they'd hire hard-assed "don't care about anyone" type people to do their reporting, people who are instantly suspicious, like Jack Germond was, of power.

    There's a reason why Germond is fed up, as he put it in his book.  It's because everybody else is so in thrall to the powerful that they're basically not reporting useful news.

    All your vote are belong to us

    by Harkov311 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:41:31 PM PDT

    •  Kurtz is worse (4.00)
      than an access-hungry, easy-questioning White House reporter.

      In his WP writing and his CNN show, Kurtz has become a kind of media pope, deciding what reporting fits the dogma of the Beltway conventional wisdom.

      And, as we know, that dogma includes such taken-on-faith bullshit like Bush is popular, the war is good, rich people pay too much in taxes, poor people are worthless losers, politicians are not influenced by campaign contributions and free luxury trips, etc.

      Anyone who questions the dogma is excommunicated by Pope Howard, which keeps the rest of them in line.

      The Republicans want to cut YOUR Social Security benefits.

      by devtob on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:08:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Outsiders looking in ... (none)
      These are people with no independent achievement to warrant their exalted place in the public eye and their exalted salary.  It makes for insecurity, and that's why they fawn.  They know deep down that anybody with a bit of cleverness (which is not a rare attribute) can do what they do.  They are outsiders looking in.  Tom Friedman's the same.

      Compare them with Krugman.  Paul is an absolutely outstanding economist -- as good as they come.  He has nothing to prove to anyone, and no one can take away his contributions to the discipline.  Looking back a long way, the same could be said of Linus Pauling.  

      There is an elite in this country that got where they are by real achievement.  Another that is there by luck and connection.  The second class are afraid.  It shows every day in what they say and write.  And they can't stand people who are not afraid like them.

  •  This is a magic moment: (4.00)
    Byrd: one of my all time heroes.

    Woodruff: a recent sworn enemy, given her non-stop Dean bashing during the primaries.

    The former telling it like it is, the latter embarrassed to be accussed of the truth for a change.

    Akin to Stewart telling Crossfire its "hurting America."

    Long live our Republic, and statesmen like Byrd.

    "The government is us...you and me!" -Theodore Roosevelt

    by Republic Not Empire on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:57:17 PM PDT

  •  Some Democrats??????? (4.00)
      WOODRUFF: Well, let me ask you this, there are Democrats...
    I am sick of this type of crap! The corporate media has NEVER had a problem before of naming names before,especially when Dems are involved.
     I think we need to email bomb Corproate News Network and Demand they no longer use one Dem  agianst another without naming the so-called people!
     I wish Byrd had replied "What Dems? and "I know some repugs who say dumbya is an asshole!"
     

    Protect Life Bring The Troops Home!

    by arkdem on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:57:40 PM PDT

    •  I'm with you on that (none)
      I hate when they use that slippery language.  Al Franken actually makes fun of this slippery language in one of his books.  He asks (more or less) how many is some?  100?  1,000?  A million?  Or just 2?  There's no way to tell.

      All your vote are belong to us

      by Harkov311 on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:00:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  See also Byrd's use of the word 'horseradish' (none)
    In the transcript.
  •  Byrd's onto something HUGE here... (4.00)
    ...that we should use like a blunt instrument. He just told the MSM that they were intimidated by the rightwing. The first response? Not Me!

    Think about it--this is the same response the MSM has gotten beaten into it by the right. The right says you're biased and the MSM reflexively says "Not me!" and then go on to prove it by spreading rightwing smears.

    desmoulins says below that we Dems should say that the right is trying to intimidate us. I respectfully disagree. One, we need to get away from positioning ourselves as wimps. We're not. And two, Byrd does it so much better by pointing the finger at the MSM and claiming that they're intimidated.

    That should be our national talking point, from all Dems everywhere. The MSM is scared, they're intimidated, they're shaking in their boots, they're afraid to ask tough questions, etc. They should never hear anything different from us anywhere ever again, until they fulfill their role or fold up and get out of the way of us crazies on the Internets.

    •  You know what they're going to do (none)
      They're going to wait until a Democrat wins the White House and then they'll find their spine all over again.  It's going to keep happening until we get a real VLWC up and running.  

      Tom DeLay's GOP: cheating America in a time of war.

      by Tom Frank on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:03:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Still... (4.00)
        ...you made an effective point below that Judy was pushed off of her game by becoming the story. That is exactly the same mechanism that the right has used with the whole "liberal bias" trope. It's been very effective.

        And I think this one would be equally effective, for much the same reason: there's probably an inherent belief within the MSM that it's true, they have been intimidated.

        •  You're right (4.00)
          I'm torn between cynicism and hope.  Before Reid cynicims pretty much had the run of the place.  Now, they're drawn a chalk line right about down the middle.  In my line of thinking Byrd was onto something, but what the hell difference does it make.  I hadn't thought of using his argument as a meme, a tool to draw the media as a whole back to some semblance of integrity.  Having reality on our side, that campaign could have real legs.  

          You've helped hope move his chalk line just over enough to retake the fridge and toaster.  Thanks for that.  

          Tom DeLay's GOP: cheating America in a time of war.

          by Tom Frank on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:04:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Way to go, Bobby!! (4.00)
    When I lived in WV, for 15 years, someone told me "The Senator is coming to Moorefield to talk to us." I said, "Which Senator?" I was informed that in WV "THE Senator" is Robert Byrd, known to his constituents as "Bobby", and the other Senators are referred to as "Senator Whoever". But THE Senator is Robert Byrd. I always voted for him, and wish I still could. He is a great man and a great Senator. I wish there were more like him. I hope he stays in the Senate until he dies, please God that will be years from now, and that he goes on the Senate floor with one of his wonderful speeches in one hand and his copy of the Constitution in the other. He has been a shining example of what a Senator should be, a person whose personal beliefs and public commitments have evolved with the times. I know people say that he was a racist, well, back then most everyone was. But he grew out of that, unlike some other sitting Senators and Congressmen, and has evolved into a Constitutional scholar, Senate historian and a man who stands up for the rights of the "little guy". He will pick the rights of the man in the street over the corporations every time. I will contribute to his campaign, as I have in the past, and I hope he wins by a landslide, as usual.

    What happens when Bush takes Viagra? he gets taller. Robin Williams

    by Demfem on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 05:02:03 PM PDT

  •  Go, Senator Byrd! (3.92)
    He's showing just how easy it is to turn the tables on stupid questions.  Howard Dean has been doing this somewhat lately, too -- maybe because of his immersion in Lakoff.  

    As suggested above, EVERY TIME they use the "some people say" construction, smart Dems -- and too bad there aren't more -- should refuse the framing.  Make thme defend the premises of their questions.  Verbal jiu-jitsu:  

    "Some Democrats?  Who do you mean?  Name some names, Judy.  I can't argue with make-believe people."

    Other good suggestions above, too, i.e., the "some Republicans think that Bush is a terrible leader, too.  But we need specifics."

    Refuse the frame.  Put the media whores on the defensive.  Or, as Eric Alterman would have it, start working the refs right back.  It rattles them, and it works.

  •  Dear Judy: Gimme a break!! (none)
  •  Woohoo! (none)
    Give 'em hell, Senator!

    Woodruff is probably right, though, that she and her organization have not been intimidated. They don't need to be intimidated to shill for the Bushites.

  •  Of course she's not intimidated (4.00)
    Everyone on this site needs to read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky.  The Propaganda Model outlined therein observes quite obviously, why would corporate media ever try to undermine corporations?  Of course Woodruff, Peter Jennings, O'Reilly and the rest are not "intimidated"-they wouldn't be hired by CNN, ABC, and FOX in the first place if they were the type to actually ask questions that might threaten power, which these days happens to be enormously concentrated private capital controlled by a few multi-national corporations.  Do you think Amy Goodman's phone is ringing off the hook for her to start up a show on CBS?

    Our goal should be to continually strive toward building democratic media institutions that truly reflect the broad range of opinions and interests of the American people.  The community at Daily Kos is certainly a step in that direction.  Robert McChesney's freepress is also doing fantastic work.  Let's keep it up!

  •  Gotta Love Sen. Byrd! (none)
    The man is a national treasure!  If only West Virginians would agree to trade him for Evan Bayh then I could be proud of my senator too.  Trade Sen. Byrd to Indiana!  I'll throw in the Pacers too, deal?
    •  Trade for the Pacers? (none)
      Well sure you want to throw them in the deal now - REGGIE'S RETIRING!

      No thanks. I think we'll keep our National Treasure, Senator Robert C. Byrd. :-)

      •  No deal then? (none)
        sniffs  No deal then?  You won't take Sen. Bayh in trade?  You won't bite on the Pacers? How about the Indy Colts?  I'll toss them in too!  Indy 500?  Come on...this might be my only hope to get Indiana a decent Senator. Make the most of Sen. Byrd's Golden Years fixing a red state. My mother growls when I mention taking Sen. Levin from her so that's out. Want to make her mad?  Just bring up trading her Gov. Jennifer with Gov. Mitch "Eli Lily" Daniels.  hehehehe No chance of that either but I'm still trying.  
    •  Move to WV! (none)
      Here's another suggestion - move here to Almost Heaven. Low cost of living, low crime rate, breathtaking scenery, whitewater rafting, skiing, AND Sen. Byrd.

      There are excellent school districts & a great university in Morgantown, BTW. It's a great place to raise a family.

      And did I mention that we have Sen. Byrd?

  •  What I Wished Byrd Had Said (4.00)
    "Judy, have you ever heard the term 'media whore'?"

    We the undersigned urge you to support Federal funding for research using human pluripotent stem cells. -80 Nobel Laureates to Pres. Bush

    by easong on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:09:46 PM PDT

  •  Ed Schultz loves Sen. Byrd (none)
    I caught the tail end of Sen. Byrd as a guest on the Ed Schultz show this afternoon.  Afterwards, Ed (Big Eddie!) went on and on about what a great man he is, said he could talk for an hour to him, what a treasure he is, etc.  

    I am really starting to appreciate Ed Schultz.  He's not predictable on every issue but I absolutely think he can connect with people who won't listen to Al Franken et al. (I like them both!)

    •  Ed Schultz loves Sen. Byrd (4.00)
      Did you guys hear me on Ed Schultz's show today? I was the one that challenged the right winger who called in and tried to undermine Sen. Byrd's comments by calling him a racist. The right wingers keep bring that up as part of their talking points.

      It really irritates the hell out of me that Republicans are trying to cynically call Democrats racists.  They think African Americans are stupid!

      I have so much respect and adoration for Senator Byrd. I pray that he continues to be well and I pray for his ailing wife of many years.  I live in Georgia where Republicans took over the state due to the corrupt Diebold voting machines and Dems not campaigning in Georgia. I wish I had Senator Byrd and Max Clellan as our senators. Instead, we have Bush asskissers Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson.

  •  Judy Woodruff Is a Media Republican (3.66)
    Judy Woodruff is most certainly intimidated...but why would she care? She's clearly a Republican, and constantly vets for the conservative side of the aisle on her briadcast.

    I stopped watching her program months before the election, and now rarely tune in. She's quite positive and blindly supportive of everything on the Bush Administration agenda. I was especially disgusted at the way she subtly but obviously trashed John Kerry last fall during the cmapaign.

    CNN would be wise to take her off the air. Send her to Fox where she belongs!

  •  Byrd missed an opportunity (4.00)
    To pull a Dean. Dean REFUSES to answer unattributed quotes.

    This technique should be used by every Democrat all the time. The unattributed quotes MUST stop.

    Dean has had it with the propogandist using the bull shit 'some people say'... in their 'question' to make their propoganda point.

    And so have I. And so should all Democrats everywhere.  

    Freedom does not march.

    by ex republican on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:35:26 PM PDT

    •  Sign me too! (none)
      It comes from listening very carefully to the question or sentence and how it's phrased.

      Thank you for bringing this forward!

    •  Your point is taken... (4.00)
      ...however, you'll notice Byrd actually did refuse to answer the question - and in fact, turned the table right around on her, speaking of media intimidation. To address her nebulous "there are Democrats" quote would have gotten him off this path.

      Byrd chose the wiser move. Dean would approve.

      "I'm here to fertilize the grassroots." - G. W. Bush

      by Hell Upside Down on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:58:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think your right (none)
        The Dean bit works best in a press conference where he can pick the next questioner. It wouldn't work nearly as well in a one on one time constrained TV interview where you save your best punch till just before commercial.

        Byrd is cannier than I gave him credit for initially.

        Still, I'd sure like Judy's 'some people say' slapped down hard someday.

        Freedom does not march.

        by ex republican on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 09:19:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  exactly... (none)
      ...and Dems must learn to be wary of the passive voice as well.  "It's been said..."  etc.

      Same response:  "It's been said by WHO, Judy / Wolf / Tim / [insert media whore here]?"

  •  Bryd did his job, we should do ours (4.00)
    Byrd called her on it, should send emails to her siting examples as to why he's right.

    Here are some examples I quickly dug up(probably are better ones out there).

    Woodruff on Rove :

    ROVE: Step aside, I'll be happy to do it. [Takes King's microphone] The president is making an incredible presentation to the audience here in Fargo, North Dakota. The crowd has received an overwhelming -- his reform message of Social Security. The crowd broke into a strong applause when the president attacked the mainstream media --

    KING: It's not bad. I'd keep your day job, but that's not bad.

    [Video clip ends]

    WOODRUFF: I'd say more than not bad. I think we're ready to hire Karl Rove right now. We'll start -- we'll make the phone call right after the show.

    Woodruff and Joe Johns :

    # JUDY WOODRUFF (CNN host): "As some House Republicans tell it, their vote today to change party rules was not just about protecting Tom DeLay. They say it was about taking power away from a Democratic prosecutor who they believe may be eager to indict their majority leader."

    # JOE JOHNS (CNN congressional correspondent): "Fearing House Majority Leader Tom DeLay could be indicted in a grand jury investigation in Texas, rank-and-file Republicans in the House move to protect him from losing power if it happens. They see the Texas case, led by a prosecutor who is a Democrat, as politically motivated." [CNN, Inside Politics, 11/17/04]

    You can leave feedback here.  

    "When your opponent is drowning, throw the son of a bitch an anvil." -- James Carville

    by sgilman on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:41:39 PM PDT

  •  Judy Woodruff should read this thread (none)
    every word of it.  How could we see that she does?
  •  You're hurting America, Judy (4.00)
    I wish all the Dems who appear on the cable shows would pick up the Jon Stewart meme and just hammer all of them with it:  "YOU'RE HURTING AMERICA, {fill in the name}"

    We need not stride resolutely towards catastrophe, merely because those are the marching orders. -- Noam Chomsky

    by kainah on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:48:19 PM PDT

  •  YEEEEEES! (none)
    That was the all time best comment I've EVER heard a Senator make.  ANd an 84 yr old one at that!  That rocked!!!  Thank you for cpaturing that, Rimjob!

    "The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye. The more light you shine on it, the more it will contract." Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

    by pontificator on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:57:55 PM PDT

  •  I didn't catch Byrd's appearance.... (none)
    and it appears I missed a good one. I really like Senator Byrd's candidness, which is a rare thing for politicians in Washington.

    BTW, thanks for posting the transcript.

  •  In another thread... (none)
    I wrote that I didn't pay much attention to the MSM (I should qualify that I meant TV. I still read the newspapers).

    Sen. Byrd hits the nail on the head as to exactly why I don't bother to watch the infotainment that passes for news today.

    But the list, I'd say TV news is not just "intimidated", but also lazy and uninformed.

  •  Woodruff - liar, liar, liar (none)
    They still don't get it. . .

    Republicans are not concern of our well-being or any kind of freedom we have for that matter. . .

    they are just drunk with power, lust and the mighty dollar. . .

    Keep Your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars. . .

    by private5star on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 07:36:38 PM PDT

  •  Thank you Senator! (none)
    Even better than Ms. Woodruff -- I hope the Senator sees this post:

    Thank you!  I appreciate your speaking out.  Your strong words do good.

    Please join me in thanking ....

  •  Thank the er, Higher Power for Sen. Byrd (4.00)

    No, he isn't perfect but most of the time he's awfully good.

    And, to be sure, he isn't a fascist, and he doesn't feel he has to suck up to fascists.

    More Byrds and Boxers, pleeze, and fewer Bidens and Weepin' Joe Liebermans.

    "If Jesus returns, Karl Rove will kill him." (Harvey Wasserman)

    by proudtinfoilhat on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:06:03 PM PDT

  •  Byrd is our champion. (none)
    Now the Dems should take on Russert & Blitzer. And more importantly, stop all Democrats from appearing on FOX.

    Like pygmies on the battlefield of history, we cower like whipped dogs in the face of political pressure. . . Robert Byrd 12/04.

    by Lords on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:29:14 PM PDT

  •  She is an utter failure (none)
    TV news is competitive. Everybody assesses themselves and others by how much camera time they get. Camera time is everything. ME, ME, ME on the tube. Anyone who has successfully navigated to being on the tube with any regularity is a grotesque egomaniac, driven by messianic notions of their own worth. The fact that they smile, are blow-dried, or wear pastel glosses over the ravenous insecurities befouling their inner lives. No degree of sophistication or high-mindedness will ever alter this principal rule in TV news.

    Judy is a benefactor within this monstrous system. She obviously has conditioned herself to adore the powerful men who decide to give her air time, and she has transferred this needy, insatiable idolotry to powerful political men as well.

    I personally feel Byrd was too compliant. It would've been easy to point out the fallacy behind Woodruff's claim. One word. Iraq. But he's getting on in years so he's the last guy I want to come down hard on.

    Don't forget though that the RWCM loves to trot him out whenever they can, in order to squelch any idea that the left is peopled by vivacious competent people. That's not a slam against Byrd, but it's why he always gets a green light for TV interviews, not due to respect or deference, but because he dodders a bit and slurs some of his consonants. Since the wingbots are ageist cretins who would just as soon euthanize the elderly as play mah-jongg with Terri Schiavo, they feel that the very sight of Byrd will make people run screaming to the ranks of the Great Leader's Party.

    There is a certain providence in the fall of a sparrow

    by mrblifil on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 09:05:35 PM PDT

  •  Saw Byrd in person two weeks ago (4.00)
    I went to Washington, D.C. and got a tour of the capitol through my Senator's office. When we walked towards the entrance to one of the halls he was standing near a door. He began talking to our tour group, asking where we were from and seeing how we were doing. He also never said who he was (I knew instantly it was Byrd) and merely said "Well I'm from West Virginia." He had a hat and an umbrella in hand and was in a big black coat, suit and tie. He was very friendly. The catch? The Senate wasn't even in session! It seems he comes over to chat with the public often. A true Democrat, I say.
  •  Get him on more shows (none)
    I heard him on the Radio today......

    To the point of intimidation - Byrd was amember of the KKK and has renouced that.  He's said it's his biggest regret.  The Republicans still use it against him in order to intimidate him.

    Judy isn't really a candidate for intimidation though. CNN is intimidated, but I doubt that Woodruff would ever think independently, so there's no cause for her to second guess herself.

    What's so funny about Peace, Love and Understanding? - Elvis Costello

    by mungley on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 10:08:40 PM PDT

  •  The people DID ask questions... (none)
    and the people DID speak out. No one in the Senate or the media listened. They ignored the protests and the letters to the editor and the blogs and the entire anti-war movement.

    Fight terrorists wherever they be found/Well why you not bombin Tim McVeigh's hometown?? - Michael Franti

    by missreporter on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 05:03:38 AM PDT

  •  re: Judy W - private comments v CNN (none)
    The interesting thing about Judy W is that she spoke at American University's School of Communication graduation speech last summer and pleaded with the students not to be cowed in silence, to ask tough questions about the war and suggested that the press had screwed up - it was a bit of a coded anti-Iraq war speech I think.
    Interestingly she seems to either be censored or self censored when she is on CNN
    •  Barbara Bush The Elder... (none)
      ...said that Judy Woodruff was one of the Liberal Media personalities who gave her boys a hard time.  I don't watch cable news, but judging from all the comments I've heard about JW on the liberal blogs, I found that extremely hard to believe.  But maybe she's different under different conditions.
  •  Late to the party (none)
    Notice her little helper

    "It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." --Thomas Paine "And the world from this President"--BOHICA

    by BOHICA on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 08:39:08 AM PDT

pontificator, Bob Johnson, Colorado Luis, vitor, spyral, MRL, paradox, RobertInWisconsin, Alfred E Newman, tmo, Dunkerque, mikepridmore, daunte, skyesNYC, assyrian64, bob in ny, moon in the house of moe, Margot, Sedge, RHunter, GreenSooner, Raybin, Southern Bird, Show Me Dem, Unstable Isotope, Reino, Alan S, tiberius, Winger, ArkansasJoseph, gorlim, TechBob, Diane Chambers, Titian, Tom Frank, CleverNickName, cotterperson, doginfollow, ssteuer, Ralfast, Stein, beagleandtabby, pacified, Heteraetcaetera, nepstein, movie buff, TX Unmuzzled, qw3rty, shetquaker, akreit, x, osterizer, sersan, expriest, blksista, caliberal, Muboshgu, Carnacki, object16, MFL, puppethead, Poika, Cache, zelda, BillyZoom, Vitarai, jane 2000, cfr, RubDMC, Kenevan McConnon, mlafleur, ignatz1138, Jon B Good, Dr Know, silas216, macdust, DrKate, daisy democrat, Mary Julia, lalawguy, demokath, boadicea, ksh01, citizengeo, narrowback gal, buckhorn okie, Appalled, jdog269, biggb23, chechecule, sgilman, kaypaul, larryrant, lorax, PeteZerria, Jesterfox, consta, splashy, antirove, Alohaleezy, McQ, aitchdee, RealDeal2004, Oke, kharma, hopesprings, scorpiorising, dejavu, Eric Blair, NYC Sophia, Miss Jones, missliberties, DianeL, grannyhelen, alivingston, kenjib, mott street, Moosa Man, Hawksana, venice ca, GN1927, Penny Century, DeanFan84, RebeccaG, socal, Eddie Haskell, sommervr, Democratic Hawk, TheJohnny, cevad, southernblues, lorraine, firetop, Raine Hawking, parkslopper50, ybruti, glattonfolly, WV Democrat, cinnamongirlthree, orthogonal, glooperoo, DrReason, HK, d to the f, negropontedeathsquads, rickroks, Mikeybabe, skippythebox, gradinski chai, vcmvo2, Fabian, chumley, mediaprisoner, LeftistIndependent, willowby, FixerMX, goffnews

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site