Guest Editorial
The Media Is Keeping The Bush Campaign Alive
by Mike Hersh

Oct. 25, 2000 -- The media has kept Governor George W. Bush in the present presidential race by repeating dishonest attacks on Vice President Al Gore for "lies" which turn out to be Gore telling the truth, such as Al Gore's comments about a little girl who was the 32nd student in a classroom designed for 24, and the trip he really did make to fires in Texas. In the first instance, Kailey Ellis did have to stand in her classroom; in the second it was a simple mixup -- Gore was in Texas to view the disaster, but with the Assistant Director of FEMA, not the Director, James Lee Witt – with whom Gore has visited some dozen other disaster sites over the years. In both instances, Gore used specifics to make a point.   The media jumped all over Gore, failing to make clear what the point of his comments were --  under closer scrutiny, these issues favor Al Gore.

For example, Gore was right about the costs of drugs for people vs. pets. A detailed report from the House of Representatives proves Gore had the numbers exactly right.

Gore did take the initiative in Congress toward creating the Internet from earlier, much smaller, limited-access systems. Even the former GOP Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich credits Gore with leading the telecommunications reforms which helped pave the "Information Superhighway."

Gore accurately described his trailblazing Congressional hearings on toxic waste, but the media twisted his comments into claims he "discovered" Love Canal, a claim which he never made in the first place. Some "reporters" mocked Al Gore for off-hand comments about "Love Story," which were based on an inaccurate Tennessee newspaper story Gore had read. In fact, Gore and his college roommate Tommy Lee Jones were the inspiration Oliver, the protagonist of "Love Story," according to the author Erich Segal, not Gore himself.

Some in the media accuse Gore of "lying" about his role in campaign finance reform. This is another dishonest attack. Gore said he sponsored bills to reform campaign finance, but never claimed he specifically cosponsored the McCain/Feingold reform bill. Senator Russ Feingold praised Gore for championing the issue long before Feingold even thought of running for office!

The media ignored the truth in all of these instances, and piled on with empty accusations that Gore was embellishing or even lying! Then, rather than correct their errors, media outlets continued to play fast and loose, trying to show Al Gore plays fast and loose.

By contrast, when it comes to Governor Bush, the media ignores his fundamental misstatements of fact -- and allows him to make up fake accusations with impunity.  For example, Bush looked into the TV cameras and LIED when he claimed that Gore had outspent him on the campaign. Bush also LIED about his prescription drug plan covering "all" seniors. Bush LIED when he asserted that Gore was using "phony" and "fuzzy" numbers on the Bush tax plan.

Under mild cross-examination by Good Morning America's Charlie Gibson, Bush was forced to admit that Gore was 100% right about Bush's tax plan. Bush does promise to give more than 40% of the entire surplus to the 1% of Americans who need it least. Yet Bush LIED over and over and over during the first debate, and even repeated the lie in the second debate when he tried to claim GORE was dishonest. Finally, Bush came clean in the third debate.

But where was the media? Where was the outrage?   Gore had told the truth about the Bush deficit hike scheme, which WOULD send more than 40% of the entire surplus to the richest 1%, and IS a larger share of the projected surplus than Bush would earmark for Social Security, defense, the environment, education, and Medicare COMBINED.

As Gore has said during the debates, Bush's top economic advisor Martin Anderson admitted that his Social Security plan would force the trust fund to borrow as much as $3 TRILLION. Bush has promised the same $1 TRILLION currently in the Social Security to both old folks and to young people.

Of course, he can't give the money to both.

Al Gore asked Bush which group would get what.

This was, and remains, a critically important question.

Why isn't the media demanding to know the answer?

Bush also lied when he claimed Al Gore is a "big spender" who would "grow" the government. His only "proof" is a sham -- a dishonest partisan report prepared by Republicans in Congress. Bush even lied about who prepared the report.  Gore told the truth about his record for cutting the size of government over the past seven years -- and Bush's Texas record of growing the size and head count of state government.

Somehow, Gore got hammered while Bush smirked. Why the double standard?  The last time media shielded a candidate like this was 1980. The press gave a free pass to Ronald Reagan, overlooking wild assertions made by the former California governor such as "nuclear proliferation isn't any of our business." They even attacked then-President Jimmy Carter for telling the truth about Reagan's economic proposals. Reagan won -- and everything Carter told us about Reagan came true, and worse.

Once again, as in 1980, the media is AWOL as an affable candidate runs on a platform of voodoo economics, foreign policy naiveté and simplistic, hypocritical moralizing.

Speaking of AWOL -- where is the discussion of Bush's near-year-long gap in his National Guard service record? The Boston Globe did write about it, but the talking heads are mute on that subject.

They are also mute when Bush and Cheney attack decisions to send US forces to contain conflicts in potential hot spots. This was known at one time as the "Cheney Doctrine."

They are mute when Bush and Cheney attack our military readiness -- despite the fact that Clinton and Gore are reversing the cuts which Bush's father began as President when Cheney ran the Pentagon.

And speaking of Cheney running the Pentagon -- where is the examination of his shady dealings? Cheney steered contracts laden with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to Halliburton when he was Defense Secretary. In return, he cashed in as their CEO after he left his "public" service. Self-service is more like it. And Cheney kept up the "self-serve" conduct after taking over at Halliburton, demanding huge bonuses for himself after firing thousands of workers and cutting employees benefits.

It's not just the greed and heartlessness, it's the broken promises and the disdain for the 99% of us not targeted for the huge Bush tax cuts, demonstrated by Cheney's cold-blooded votes in Congress to cut Headstart and keep Nelson Mandela in jail. Bush himself makes cryptic statements about making Headstart "a reading program." Headstart works the way it is. It doesn't need drastic changes. Who can look at this sort of talk and expect "compassionate conservatism" from Cheney, or the man who picked his to serve a heartbeat from the presidency? 

Bush is not without shady dealings himself. His bad baseball goes far beyond trading Sammy Sosa for Harold Baines. Bush broke his word, shaking down Texas taxpayers by threatening to move their ball club unless they gave him millions of dollars and free land for the new ballpark in Arlington. Bush demanded sales taxes and pocketed the proceeds when he padded his tiny stake in the Texas Rangers into a multimillion dollar bonanza.

Read my lips: those are new taxes.

All the while Bush called this "entrepreneurialism" and lashed out at poor women and kids who rely on government. When Bush got to the Governor's mansion, he turned it into the Best Political Whorehouse in Texas. Since then, the record shows, Bush has held Texas "hostile" to ALL children.

All this hypocrisy. All these lies. All these policies, both public and private -- but so little attention on the Sunday talk shows and the newspaper headlines.

Why the double standards? Why do reporters accuse Gore of lying and let Bush join their chorus of piddling accusations when Bush spews bald-faced lies on critical issues such as Social Security, taxes, spending, Medicare and the candidates' records?

Meanwhile, there is a LONG and growing list of attacks against Al Gore by the New York Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, and other media outlets. They keep twisting what Gore said and then attacking him as inaccurate. This lazy, sloppy, and shoddy "journalism" is keeping Bush in this race.

Why is the media so one sided? Is it just to maintain the horse race? Or do they just like Bush better? Either way, the media is failing in its role as unbiased surrogate eyes and ears for the voters.

The W. Bush candidacy would be over already, a "dead campaign walking," were it not for a media that has shielded Bush from his own gaffes and tried to conceal his all-too-obvious incompetence.

Texas has a weak governor system, and can survive a weak, unqualified governor as they fall toward the bottom in standard of living, pollution, health and numerous other categories. We won't mess with Texas. We'll leave that up to Bush. After all, they decided they wanted to endure him.

But we cannot afford a leader who makes foolish statements, offers reckless proposals that do not add up and then double-talks about it, shows inexperience and poor judgment, and lies.  America cannot afford President George W. Bush.