Quite the charmer.
The Gadflyer
Copyright © 2004 New Progressive Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Mad
As Hell
How I got a disturbing view of Brent Bozell's undying rage
by Paul Waldman, Editor-in-Chief
8.19.04
Warning: some of the material in this article is not suitable for small
children.
Last night I appeared on Fox News' O'Reilly Factor, debating Brent Bozell
of the Media Research Center (he's the one with red hair and a beard;
you may have seen him). If you're not familiar with the MRC, they're one
of a number of well-funded conservative groups established to complain
about liberal media bias. If tomorrow's lead story in the New York Times
were headlined, "Bush Is Second Coming of Christ," Bozell would say with
complete conviction that it showed their blatant liberal bias, because
they didn't compliment the color of the President's tie. Ironically,
despite the liberal stranglehold on the press, Bozell himself has no
trouble garnering media attention; a Lexis-Nexis search reveals that he
gets quoted in one media outlet or another about once every three days.
Bozell and I were there to discuss the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. I've
been on O'Reilly four times now, and the format is always the same: I'm
the sacrificial liberal, there to be tag-teamed by the host (in this case
guest host John Gibson) and the conservative guest. We'll get to what
happened on the air in a moment, but what is of more interest is what
happened afterward.
Although Bozell and I were both in the Fox studios in Washington, we sat
in different rooms to tape the show. After we finished, both of us
returned to the green room to remove our makeup. Upon my arrival there, my
feeling - as it usually is in this kind of situation - was that it
wouldn't do much good for either of us to continue our argument off the
air. I feel as passionately about politics as anyone, but let's face it,
Brent Bozell and I are not going to convince each other of anything. In
person, I try to be polite to everyone, even those whose political views I
find repellent. Perhaps a little naïvely, I thought Bozell would feel the
same way; we'd wipe our faces, wish each other good evening, and be on our
separate ways.
But alas, it was not to be. The moment I walked in, Bozell looked at me
angrily and said, "That was horseshit, what you said!" I reconstruct here
the rest of the discussion as best I can recall. Although I wrote it down
on the way home, a word here or there may be less than precise. Rest
assured, though, the nasty parts from Bozell are verbatim:
WALDMAN: What part of it?
BOZELL: You're a liar!
WALDMAN: What are you talking about?
BOZELL: That stuff about Kerry!
WALDMAN: What, about atrocities?
BOZELL: He called them war criminals!
WALDMAN: He didn't accuse any individuals of anything.
BOZELL: You're a liar!
WALDMAN: He never accused those guys of anything.
BOZELL: John Kerry is a liar, and you're a liar!
WALDMAN: What are you talking about?
BOZELL: ***** you!
At that, Bozell stormed out. I should note that throughout this little
argument, I remained calm, partly in an attempt to diffuse Bozell's
boiling rage, but also because I was genuinely having a hard time figuring
out what he was trying to get across. Bozell, in contrast, looked as
though his head was about to explode, his voice growing louder and his
face redder. I would say that I was afraid he was going to take a swing at
me, but I don't think "afraid" is quite the right word. I'm quite a few
years younger than Bozell, and though I suspect he fights dirty, I have a
black belt in Tae Kwon Do, so I'm pretty sure I could take him.
Fortunately, it didn't come to that.
I had never met Bozell before, though I had seen him on television. He
always struck me as a rather angry fellow, but how one comes across in a
five-minute segment on television doesn't necessarily reflect one's true
personality. And I have no reason to think he doesn't love his family, pay
his taxes, and have a genuine desire to make his country a better place.
But there's something very disturbing about looking right-wing rage in the
face. After all, Bozell should be a happy man. Not only do his
conservative compatriots control all three branches of government, but his
years of work browbeating the media have paid off handsomely. The
mainstream press in America is gripped by cowardice, terrified at every
turn that Bozell and his supporters will come down on them with an
avalanche of emails, phone calls and letters charging them with liberal
bias. Over the course of his presidency, George W. Bush has gotten more
respectful press coverage than any president since John F. Kennedy. And
recent years have seen the rise of a powerful, profitable right-wing media
in which Bozell's views get wide airing. In many ways, Bozell has won the
war he's been fighting for so long. Yet the fire of anger burns within him
unabated.
Much has been made of liberals' anger at President Bush, and that anger is
certainly real. But if Bush loses in November, that anger will dissipate.
You'll be able to find liberals angry about one issue or another at one
time or another, but you won't find them simmering with a generalized
fury. But many conservatives remain angry, even at the height of their
power. They'll be angry if Bush loses, and they'll be angry if he wins.
What actually happened on the air
As is usually the case, the discussion that took place on the air was not
particularly edifying, and there are things I might have added if I had to
do it over again. There was one thing I said that is inaccurate: I said
that "all" of the men who served on Kerry's boat are supporting him; in
fact, 11 of the 12 men who served on his boat are supporting him, and one,
Steve Gardner, is not.
As I tried to say, all the talk about whether Kerry deserved his medals is
really just a canard. The fact is that the members of Swift Boat Veterans
for Truth and their supporters aren't mad because the injuries for which
he received his Purple Hearts weren't severe enough, they're mad
because Kerry spoke out against the war. Specifically, they're angry that
he said atrocities were committed, and that he personally saw atrocities.
It has absolutely nothing to do with whether Kerry deserved all his
medals.
As far as I can tell, some Vietnam vets have made the following
connection: I was in Vietnam at the same time as Kerry, and at one time or
another participated in operations with him; he says he saw atrocities;
therefore he has accused me personally of committing atrocities. I could
certainly understand how one would be angry and insulted at being accused
of committing atrocities, but as far as I can tell Kerry has never accused
any particular person of committing atrocities.
Veterans can claim that no atrocities ever took place during the Vietnam
War if they'd like (and I'd be interested to hear them make that
argument), and they can even try to show that Kerry never witnessed any
atrocities, but no individual can claim that Kerry has accused him
personally of being a war criminal. Among the torrent of hate mail I've
received since my appearance last night, a number of Vietnam veterans have
expressed their anger at Kerry; one wrote, "I served in Vietnam and still
do not like his calling all of us murderers, rapists, etc." The bitterness
and anger is certainly heartfelt, but I am unaware of a quote in which
Kerry said that every single person who served in Vietnam is a murderer
and/or a rapist. Some people obviously think he did, but that doesn't make
it true.
As for Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, their fifteen minutes are almost up.
Here is the transcript of the show:
JOHN GIBSON: And thanks for staying with us. I'm John Gibson in for
Bill O'Reilly. And in the FACTOR FOLLOW UP segment tonight, the real
fallout from the swift boat controversy. A new study says the
anti-Kerry ad from the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is making
some independent voters, who were previously leaning towards Senator
Kerry, second guess their vote. This could spell big trouble for John
Kerry.
Joining us now from Washington is Paul Waldman, the editor of
Gadflyer.com and the author of "The Press Effect: Politicians,
Journalists, and the Stories that Shape the Political World," and
Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center and author of
"Weapons of Mass Distortion: The Coming Meltdown of the Liberal
Media."
So Brent, this ad is apparently -- well, a new study shows that it
does have some effect on independent voters. So does that mean we're
going to see more of it?
BRENT BOZELL, "WEAPONS OF MASS DISTORTION": I suspect so, because as I
understand it, they're pretty well heeled. You know, the interesting
thing is that this is a group that did a national press conference on
May 5th to talk about this issue and were completely ignored by the
media, with the exception of Fox that covered and CBS that absolutely
slammed them.
But ABC, NBC, CNN all ignored them. So they put up a Web site.
Suddenly, they're raised a million dollars, they go out with an ad,
and now come the networks all attacking them for doing an ad. It's
remarkable.
GIBSON: You know, Paul, it seems to me that you can see there is an
effect on the Kerry campaign, because all of the sudden, there is this
ad attacking George Bush in the same way. Is that the measure of the
effectiveness of the ad against Kerry?
PAUL WALDMAN, GADFLYER.COM EDITOR: Well, to an extent. But the idea
that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth haven't gotten enough media
coverage is just ludicrous. I did a Lexis-Nexis search this morning.
There have been over 500 newspaper and television stories about them
and the advertising.
GIBSON: Since the ad.
BOZELL: Since the ad.
WALDMAN: Yeah, so they are all over the place. They're getting
coverage in every major news outlet.
GIBSON: Yeah, but Paul, you're making Brent's point for him. They have
a news conference; nobody pays any attention to them. They put an ad
on the air, and suddenly they get some juice.
WALDMAN: Well, that's often the case, because political journalists
are always interested in advertising. And you're right, it does
indicate that they're being successful, because the Kerry campaign is
being forced to talk about it. And the Bush campaign is only too happy
with this.
I mean, obviously, they don't really want to talk about Iraq, they
don't really want to talk about the economy, or healthcare, or any of
these things if they can get the discussion on whether or not, you
know, John Kerry had one medal or...
GIBSON: Yeah, but Paul, wait a minute. Paul, wait a minute. It was
John Kerry who went to the Democratic Convention and said, "John Kerry
reporting for duty." I mean, he wrapped himself in the flag.
WALDMAN: There's no question that his service is a legitimate issue.
But the question is not so much whether we're talking about his
service. The question is, are the things that they're saying accurate?
And a lot of the things that are in that swift boat veterans ad are
not accurate. You know, you have this parade of guys saying, "I served
with John Kerry." Well, you know, that's true in the same sense that I
spent last night with Condoleezza Rice.
We were both in Washington, just in the same sense that these guys
were all in Vietnam at the same time as John Kerry, but they weren't
actually there. They don't actually know what happened.
GIBSON: Brent, you checked the bona fides of these claims. What do you
think?
BOZELL: Look, these are people, many of them who were with him. These
were people who treated him. These are people who have the right to
speak out. It's kind of interesting, going back to the media for a
second here that the media, which your other guest says they care
about advertising. What about caring about the truth?
What about getting to the bottom of this story, especially when a
presidential candidate has wrapped himself around this issue. He's
invited the scrutiny. You know, for three years, they've been pounding
George Bush on the National Guard service, why? Because Terry
McAuliffe, the DNC chairman, made a statement. Now you've got 200
people who were in Vietnam, some who were alongside with John Kerry,
making a statement, and they've been ignored. Suddenly, they come out
with an ad. Now they're attacked.
GIBSON: Paul...
WALDMAN: The idea that they've been pounding the president on National
Guard service is absolutely false. When you go back and look at the
coverage in 2000 when this might have been an issue, it was barely
covered at all, a few stories. They didn't really investigate it with
any kind of aggressiveness. It was only later on in this campaign that
it actually came up again. So that's just not true.
GIBSON: But Paul, wait a minute...
BOZELL: They're still asking for his dental records.
GIBSON: Paul, look, I think even if you support Senator Kerry, you've
got to admit that there are veterans out there who served with him in
the sense that they served at the same time, in the same general
place, or did the same kind of service, like they were swift boat
commanders, who are forever, forever angry with him for what he said
when he came back to this country and testified before the Senate and
wrote a book.
And that may have formed their opinion, and that may be the reason
they're still angry with him. But they are angry at him now as they
were 30 years ago, and the question to you is, do they have a right to
speak and say, "I'm mad at him, I've been mad at him for 30 years, and
I don't want him being president?"
WALDMAN: Of course, and you put your finger on the key point. They're
not mad because, you know, because his injuries for his purple hearts
weren't severe enough. They're mad because he came back and he was an
opponent of the war afterwards...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBSON: He came back and he slimed them.
BOZELL: That's right, that's right.
GIBSON: He slimed them.
BOZELL: They're mad at him because, among other reasons, he accused
them of killing women and children. That's why they're mad at him.
WALDMAN: And that's something that happened in Vietnam.
(CROSSTALK)
BOZELL: Don't start this nonsense.
GIBSON: Paul, are you doing the same thing, which John Kerry appeared
to be doing in 1971 when he made that testimony, confabulating real
facts about Vietnam -- some soldiers did that -- and saying, "The
people I served with did that, the people I worked with saw that, I
saw that happen?"
WALDMAN: Yes, but he never talked about any particular individuals in
that. He said that he saw those kinds of things, and as far as I know,
nobody has refuted that.
BOZELL: Of course they have. All these Vietnam veterans didn't do
that, come on. Cut it out. All these people said exactly that. It
didn't happen, and they challenged him. They asked him, "Give me an
example." This goes back to 1971. He couldn't provide a single
example. Don't start this nonsense again.
WALDMAN: Which one of these guys who were involved with Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth say that Kerry personally accused them of an
atrocity? Who was that?
BOZELL: John O'Neill.
GIBSON: No, but the point is that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are
saying, "We were out there running these same operations as John
Kerry. He says these atrocities happened. We were there. We didn't see
them happen. We didn't hear about them. We weren't ordered to do them.
We think he's confabulating his real experience with stuff he read
about in the news."
WALDMAN: Yes, but none of these guys was on his boat. You know, yes,
they were in the same area or in Vietnam...
GIBSON: Yes, the next boat... next boat over.
WALDMAN: So they weren't there with him every day. The guys who were
on his boat are all supporting him.
GIBSON: All right, gentlemen, thanks a lot. Brent Bozell, appreciate
it. Paul Waldman, thank you. The voters will sort this out as we
proceed toward election day. Right back with a Florida ballot measure
requiring teen girls to tell mom and dad if they want an abortion. The
ACLU and others are outraged. We'll debate whether mom and dad should
know before their grandchild is aborted right after this.
.
|
