Thursday, May 12, 2005

Slow Learners at CBS cut & paste Ken Starr

Rush Limbaugh catches CBS in a deliberate distortion. Ken Starr's words were blended around, making this-

STARR: This is a radical, radical departure from our history and from our traditions, and it amounts to an assault on the judicial branch of government. It may prove to have the kind of long-term boomerang effect, damage on the institution of the Senate that thoughtful senators may come to regret.

appear as a criticism of the Republicans in the Senate. What it actually meant, and what he said was this-

RUSH: Would it come as a surprise to you if I were to tell you that Ken Starr was not talking the Republicans triggering the nuclear option when he made that statement? Because he wasn't! I am in receipt of an e-mail written by Ken Starr in which he clarifies this, because they've been inundated at his office from people all over the place who are perplexed, curious, outraged. They don't understand. "Why in the world would you say this about the nuclear option?" Starr said, "I didn't say that about the nuclear option. I was talking about something else."

Rush continues saying the email was not written to him personally. And says:

He was talking about "the practice of invoking judicial philosophy as a grounds for voting against a qualified nominee of integrity and experience," Meaning we're not going to have a judge because he is, you know, pro-abortion or anti-abortion; we're not going to have a judge because of the way he's going to rule on cases; we're not going to have a judge because of his ideology. That's what Starr was railing against, and he points out: "Look, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Republicans didn't agree with her judicial philosophy at all. But Clinton won the election. They voted to confirm her, because elections, like ideas, have consequences. The president gets the nominees he wants. This is serious. This is a specific attempt to malign Ken Starr, to misquote him, to take him out of context, and to use the out-of-context snippet or sound bite as an attempt to rally people against the Republicans and their triggering of the nuclear option. About that, again, what Starr did say is that "caution and prudence be exercised in shifting, modifying rules, but I likewise made clear about the nuclear option that the filibuster represents an entirely new use and misuse of a venerable tradition." So the bottom line is that Ken Starr is on the right page. He's on the same page as everybody else about this but CBS sought to purposely take his sound bite out of context, and apply it to the nuclear option.

Rush: I wanted to pass this on to you and get it out there because to me it's huge. It is gigantic. It is. It is beyond irresponsible because it was done purposely. It can't be irresponsible and purposely done at the same time. Irresponsible would mean somebody wasn't paying attention. This is worse than irresponsible. It's dishonest. It's cheating. It's whatever you want to attach to it. But from now on I'm going to promise you anything comes from CBS, screw it. The first impression is going to be just like when I read the New York Times: Gee, what if that's true?

And lastly: Starr has asked CBS for the entire transcript of his interview. They are refusing. CBS is refusing to give Ken Starr the full transcript of his interview. Now, given that it's CBS and given what we already know, there are some intelligent conclusions that we can draw, and that is that Starr is right and CBS is not going to give him the evidence to prove it, leaving it his word against theirs. Well, I know whose word I'm going to accept in this, and that would be Ken Starr's.

Smoothing Plane: CBS is refusing to release the transcript. Have they forgotten that Jordan fellow? And choosing judges based on ideology. I hear dialogue fron an old movie; scientists during WWII discussing physics, or the like. Their uniformed minder says, "Yes, but is this German science, or Jewish science?"

And there is more at The Corner. Ramesh Ponnuru contacted Ken Starr and "He forwarded to me an email he had sent to someone else who had asked about this matter..." The entire email is there.

More coverage at Captain's Quarters.

No comments: