Bob Schieffer owes Harry Reid a Big Fat Apology

[Vyan]

Progressives have long ago learned not to expect a fair shake in the media. Despite, and possibly because of, decades of claims from the wingers of "Left Wing Media Bias" the media has gradually become anything but friendly towards anyone or any position exposed by those seen as "leftists."

Witness the Knock-Down Drag-Out Battle that took place between CNN and Micheal Moore this month, which ultimately led to CNN finally admitting the Moore's Data was absolutely correct and that they had made not just one, but Two Factual Mistakes in their attempt to "Fact Check" Moore.

Now it's Bob Schieffer's Turn.

This Sunday Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid appeared on Face the Nation following up on the all-nighter over the Levin-Reed Amendment to Redeploy our Troops in Iraq, which was blocked by a Republican Filibuster. Even as the show opened, Schieffer set the stage as one where Democrats were the ones being "Obstructionist."

Transcript Here.

Today on FACE THE NATION, an exclusive interview with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the battle between President Bush and Congress over Iraq. Have Democrats given up on trying to change the president's strategy? And why won't they consider plans put forth by Republicans who have their own ideas about pressuring the president to draw down our forces there? What happens in September if military leaders say they need to keep the same number of troops in Iraq? We'll ask the Democratic leader of the Senate, Harry Reid of Nevada.

Then we'll talk with Maine Senator Olympia Snowe. She's one of the Republicans who wants the president to change strategy, but can't get the Democratic leaders to work with her.

So you see, the ones who really want to change things in Iraq - are Republicans who just can't get those Damn Dirty Democrats to go along with them.

That almost sounds like the kind of regurgitated right-wing talking point that they might say on Fox News doesn't it?

Well, maybe that's because they did say it on Fox News.

Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.

WALLACE: So the Senate pulled an all-nighter on Iraq, and after Democrats failed to win a vote to pull troops out, Senator Reid pulled the defense authorization bill, blocking votes on any other ideas for how to deal with Iraq. Brit, what do you think of this as both politics and policy on the part of the Democrats?

It's rather surprising that Schieffer would become a right-wing water carrier, particularly after the verbal scolding he gave the Bush Administrations Iraq policy just last week.

I am still not sure that I believe it: The Iraqi parliament is going on vacation during the month of August.

The White House offers the lame excuse that, after all, Baghdad is hot in August – sometimes 130 degrees.

May I ask a follow-up?

How much hotter do you suppose it is if you are a wearing a helmet, full body armor, carrying ammunition and walking foot patrols through Baghdad?

The last I heard, that is how American troops are spending their August in Iraq.

For me, this does it.

God help the Iraqi people because there is not much America can do to help a government that leaves Americans dying in the streets while the parliament escapes to cooler climes.

Does this mean we should pull out immediately?

No. A sudden withdrawal could set the entire region aflame. The truth is there are no good options left. But from here on, we need to put aside the dream of building a democracy in Iraq and focus solely on what is in our national interest.

It won't be pretty, but for all our good intentions, about all we can do now is try to contain this mess, pull our troops back from the middle of this civil war, and concentrate instead on the terrorist threat that this country faces around the world.

As for what kind of government Iraq needs, let their parliament figure it out. They can get right on it when the Baghdad weather turns cooler.

So clearly this guy isn't on the "Stay-the-Course" bandwagon, yet when he has Harry Reid on to talk to him, he's scoffs - SCOFFS - when Reid dares to actually tell him the truth!

Schieffer: So, senator, let's get right to it. Last week you made a very big show of trying to force a vote to begin bringing the troops home from Iraq. You brought in cots, ordered pizza, forced senators to stay all night for a marathon debate on the war. The Republicans finally blocked a vote on that. But now you have blocked consideration of Republican proposals to bring new pressures on the president to change his strategy. Why?

Senator HARRY REID (Democrat, Nevada; Majority Leader): Bob, because that isn't what happened. We offered on many occasions the opportunity for the Republicans to let us vote on the Levin-Reed Amendment, which was also sponsored by Senator Snowe and others. It was a very important amendment, bipartisan amendment that would set a deadline for getting the troops out of Iraq. We also had a number of other bipartisan amendments that had been offered by a number of other senators. I said let's have a simple majority vote on every one of those, and, of course, they objected and blocked it. So it wasn't a question of our not being able to--not wanting to vote on this. We wanted to vote on those. The Republicans in the Senate would not allow us to vote on those.

Ok, that should do it - talking point debunked - we're all done here, right?

Not so much.

Schieffer persisted and Reid had to explain it a second time.

SCHIEFFER: Well, but that still goes to the point, senator. I mean, it is the impression of many people that you do not want to vote now on any Republican proposals because you don't feel they go far enough. And we know the get-out-now crowd doesn't want votes on those--on those issues. The stay-the-course crowd doesn't want it either. Why do you not want to let people vote on that?

Sen. REID: Bob, we tried. I offered on many occasions--not one, two, three, four occasions--many occasions said, `Let's vote on all the Iraq amendments, all of them, and have a simple majority for them.' The Republicans wouldn't let us. I'm in favor of all this. I've spent lots of time with Ken Salazar, who's pushing that one amendment, Ben Nelson, who's pushing another one. We have a number of bipartisan amendments. The one that they blocked that we didn't get a vote on was a bipartisan amendment. We want to vote on those.

It's one of the myths that's been established by this Republican spin machine and--coming from the White House that we wouldn't allow votes on this. We wanted votes on that, every one of them.

So does Schieffer relent, does he accept what Reid has to say -- does he do the diligent thing and state, "We'll just have to have our fact checkers get right on that" and let the public know what they find?

Not a chance.

He continued mockingly...

SCHIEFFER: So you're saying that if the Republicans agreed to a vote on that, you'd be willing to vote on some of these Republican proposals?

Sen. REID: We offered unanimous consent requests saying, `Let us vote on Levin-Reid, Collins-Nelson, Salazar-Alexander.' We have a number of amendments, and I offered specifically, let's vote on those. They would not let us vote on any Iraq amendment because they are more interested--minus Olympia Snowe and a few others--they're more interested in protecting the president than they are in protecting the troops.

Done yet? Has he got the message?

Uh uh.

SCHIEFFER: So in--and we're going to leave this because I have to ask you about other questions--your position is it's the Republicans who are still
blocking the vote. They're going to come on and say, `It's your fault.'

Sen. REID: Bob...

SCHIEFFER: So the divide is still there. But...

Sen. REID: Bob, but the facts are what they are

"The Facts are what they are?" That's pretty straight forward, that's pretty clear. Does Schieffer have any different facts? No, but still he persist and this next line is one that should live on in infamy.

SCHIEFFER: OK. And that's your version of the facts.

His Version of the Facts? His Version!? I know there have been a lot of cut backs in the News Biz since CBS decided to cut Katie Couric a big fat check to stink up the CBS Evening News, but can't these people even do The Google? Either Reid is correct and they offered unanimous consent votes on all the Amendments, even the Republican ones, or They Didn't. There aren't shades to that story, it doesn't have multiple alternate endings like latest Hi-Def DVD from Blockbuster Video.

The Facts are the Facts and either Reid is lying or Schieffer is accusing him of lying without proof.

Fortunately there are some journalist still worthy of the title working at the http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/washington/18cnd-cong.html">New york Times.

Senate Democrats fell short this morning, after a rare all-night session, in their attempt to force President Bush to begin withdrawing American troops from Iraq.

The measure, which called for troops to begin departing within 120 days, was defeated in a procedural vote on what is known as a cloture motion. It received 52 "yes" votes, to 47 "no" votes, but Senate rules require 60 yes votes to pass the motion, which would have overcome a Republican filibuster of the measure.

After the failure, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, proposed that the Senate take up a series of Iraq proposals and make them all subject to a simple majority vote, including the withdrawal plan that had just failed. When Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, objected, Mr. Reid then pulled the entire Pentagon-spending measure from the floor, putting off any consideration of the alternative proposals such as one to rescind the initial war authorization.

There it is, in black and white, Reid offered them a chance to vote of everything - and it was Mitch McConnell who said "NO".

Schieffer then went on to ask Olympia Snowe if the Democrats were the ones being obstructionist, since he clearly didn't believe Harry Reid's "version of the facts" and Snowe proceeded to duck the thrust of question.

She lamented a lack of "bipartisanship", but she never said it was either the Democrats or the Republicans fault.

Snowe: Well, you know--you know, it's unfortunate that we're at the critical juncture we are with respect to Iraq, and also in the United States Senate in not reflecting the will of the American people on this question. And yes, it looks like the United States Senate has been bogged down in procedural hurdles and road blocks that have lead to political stagnation and, unfortunately for the American people, at a time in which they want to change direction in Iraq.

So I understand the leader's frustration. But I think he also needs to understand that we have to reach out and be more bipartisan, that the United States Senate was founded on the principle of accommodation and consensus, and neither of which is evident. Both leaders have to come together to resolve these questions so that it doesn't look like the United States Senate simply is a matter of process and procedures and partisanship and politics to no end.

Seems to me that the one thing she didn't say about Reid was - "It's your fault."

It's Schieffers'' "Version of the Facts" that are clearly flawed here, not Reid's.

Bob Schieffer owes Harry Reid a huge Apology for his shoddy research and the disrespectful manner in which he treated one of the leaders of the U.S. Senate.

But I'm not expecting he'll be as stand-up about it as CNN was (eventually) with Moore, are you?

Not unless we remind him of what an embarrassment he was to his profession this weekend at mailto:[email protected]

We, the American Public, deserve far better.

Vyan

[Schema Thing]

1. kicked and rec'd.

way to lay it out.

[Wetzelbill]

2. I saw that

Scheef is a really weak interviewer. His research is often shoddy, and if he does know something said is wrong, he often doesn't challenge the person. I've seen people flat-out lie to him and he'll sit there and nod like an idiot. He's often good in his comments at the end of the show, but he's weak otherwise. Scheef is at his best when he has another journalist at the table assisting in asking questions, particularly Lara Logan. I think he's just too indoctrined to be all that good. So when he says that something is "your version of the facts" he's using that old journalist idea that both sides of an argument deserve equal time, no matter what. That's false. If somebody is saying that the sky is blue, and another person is saying no the sky is burnt sienna, well that second person is an idiot, and they don't deserve equal time. That isn't an equal argument. So when Bob says "Version of Facts" he's not talking about facts at all. Facts don't have a version. Something is either a fact or not. What Harry Reid said is an absolute fact. Bob wasn't looking for facts, just the other version. There were not two sides to this, Reid didn't have a version, he had the facts, which in effect is the truth of what happened. Anything else is just a version. And that version, no matter how wrong it is, is something an indoctrined guy like Scheef is always going to search for. It's a major flaw in how some people approach journalism. Instead of looking for the truth, they look for a version of it from each side.

[youngdem]

5. Don't be fooled. Ole' Bob is a card carrying Repuke

He is just playing a role, of the well-intended, marginally informed old timer who pretends to be hashing out his personal opinion on the air for the benefit of his trusting viewers.

It is just an act. He is a hard core Repuke shill through and through.

He is characterizing the Dem Congress as Obstructionist because that is what he was told to do.

Don't be frustrated. Be outraged.

[indepat]

12. Am outraged at Ole Bob's rank, putrid 'pukedness

[Diane R]

14. Bob Schieffer gave bush that 'christianity' softball during the 3rd debate.

I've always been convinced that Bob Schieffer made sure bush (who had done poorly in all the debates) got that question as the perfect final pitch to the religious base....any who were wavering were brought home with that question from Schieffer, and it was all planned by Rove.

Schieffer has always been a Bushbot.

[Bluzmann57]

3. Another recommendation

and an email sent along to CBS as well.

[gratuitous]

4. And not a peep from Schieffer

When the minority Democrats were threatening filibusters or blocking legislation, all the media types were howling about how the Democrats were thwarting the "will of the people" as evinced by the Republican majority. Now the Democrats hold a slight majority, the people are polling at better than 60% (regardless of the poll) to get the hell out of Iraq, and yet neither Schieffer nor anyone else behind a Big Microphone dares to insinuate that Republicans are going against the will of the people.

I wonder why that is . . . ?

[Time for change]

6. He certainly does

I think what these people do is make the decision that they have to adopt the "middle ground", no matter what. So if it's a choice between the truth and a far right wing version of the truth, it really doesn't matter what the truth is -- the important thing is that they stake out ground right in the middle, so that nobody will accuse them of being biased. Why go through the work of fact checking? :mad:

[jillan]

7. I AM NOT defending Scheiffer but

I watched that yesterday, and Harry Reid came off as a little wimp.
He reminded me of a nervous school age kid.

I want a leader that can be assertive and confident.
I'd would love Schumer - altho he can be a pompous ass at times. But he comes across as confident.

I think the interview yesterday brought out Harry's weaknesses as a leader.

just my 2 cents.

[defendandprotect]

10. Right -- how might Michael Moore have handled this?

Reid has some ancient ideas -- or he is trying to help the opposition --

Which is it?

I think Democrats better try to find out --

[rpannier]

17. Yeah that's it...

Senator Reid who has the support off ALL the Senate Democrats -- that includes Feingold and Boxer is really a republikkan plant who is secretly working to help the republikkans secretly undermine the American public...
I think I saw something similar on the Simpsons...only it was the Reverse Vampires in league with the Trilateral Commission.

[quiet.american]

8. Thanks so much for taking the time to spell all this out -- it's exactly what I'd felt, too!

Especially, Schieffer's dismissive -- "that's your version of the facts." WTF?

[defendandprotect]

9. How far might Chris Wallace and other American reporters go in kicking democracy in the teeth .. .

in order to hold onto their jobs?

Pretty far, I'd say --

What's with Tony Snow . . . a man pretty much on death's doorstep . . .
where is his conscience?


AND . . . THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR DECADES, FOLKS --
WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN -- ????

[donkeyotay]

11. Thank you! I caught part of that.

I was stunned with the, "that's your version of the facts." Pretty obvious that the neutral interviewer was working a side. Reid should have pulled a Michael Moore on him and refused to let it pass. He should have backed up and pointed out the bias for the benefit of the part of the audience that still doesn't realized how tilted the level playing field is.

[Supersedeas]

13. Apparently, the Rovian talking points are FACTS which are just a credible as those you can actually

verify.

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. kick and recommended

[TankLV]

16. Good luck with that - don't hold your breath...

He's a repuke shill - why expect water from a rock?

[Cobalt-60]

18. American journalism has been dead a long time

But the carcass continues to decay.
They stench can get pretty thick around your set if you view the carcass too long.