At Least Kerry's Side Was Mentioned
Reported by Eleanor - August 18, 2004 -
Special Report with Brit Hume (Aug. 18, 6:00 p.m.) provided a classic example of covering both sides (on the surface) while actually covering only one side.
This report started with Hume quoting Kerry as saying that Bush's plan to withdraw troops is a bad idea adding, "Didn't he (Kerry) say the same thing a few weeks ago?" Carl Cameron, who is supposedly covering the Kerry campaign, stated that two days after the president said that he'll reallocate 70,000 troops, Kerry said that kind of reallocation will weaken national security. When the U.S. is battling Al Qaeda in 60 nations, and having other problems in other parts of the world, shrinking the force is wrong. North Korea really has nuclear weapons. "Kerry suggested three weeks ago that he would reduce troops in Europe and Korea perhaps." During the panel discussion at the end of the program, a direct quote from Kerry was shown on the screen with part of the quote.......left out like this. Barnes or Kondracke said that the entire quote said that Kerry would withdraw troops if his plan worked as it should. The first part on the withdrawal of troops was about Iraq. (So the Kerry quote used by Cameron and Hume was taken out of context.)
Cameron then quoted Kerry as criticizing Bush's funding of benefits for vets, then added that Bush said that funding for vets has gone up twice as fast during his administration. Then Cameron showed a couple of vets in the audience standing with their backs to Kerry, saying that the military tends to lean republican.
At this point, Jim Angle covered the Bush campaign in Wisconsin. He reported that Bush talked about 5.5% unemployment on average, with Wisconsin about 1/2 point lower. Kerry is appealing to vets while Bush is appealing to current soldiers. Angle supported Bush's comment about reducing South Korean troop strength by quoting Condeleeza Rice as supporting it. He added that even though Cheney made a statement in 1991 that we should wait to withdraw troops until the nuclear threat is gone, things have changed since then. Also, NATO supports this action. This is followed by Major Garrett reminding us of the Swift Boat issue. (Lest we forget.)
Comment: Cameron's report, as you can see, had a point by point rebuttal of what Kerry said on the campaign trail today. Angle's report had supporting points for Bush's comments on the campaign trail, with no democratic position offered, except the observation that Kerry is appealing to soldiers who are no longer active, while Bush's concern lies with our fighting troops. This kind of reporting is typical.
