I'm was no particular fan of Rove. I find criticisms regarding his politicizing the war accurate and deserved. In my opinion, Rove's approach harmed public debate on the topic and brought about new political divisions within the country. And for the all the talk of his great political strategies, Bush barely won in 2000 and 2004 and the Democrats are now in control of both houses of Congress. And, now, nearly the entire country disapproves of Bush, and Republican chances of the presidency in '08 are not looking very good. Genius political strategist, eh? I think not.
However, Bill Moyers just drives me crazy. He goes around as though he is this enlightened reporter with nothing but the most pure journalist integrity. But that's hardly the case. As I blogged about months ago, Moyers' journalistic "integrity" even contradicts itself.
Well, recently, Moyers made the claim while "reporting" on Rove's resignation that Rove was an agnostic who mis-represented himself as a member of the Christian-right to gain their support for Bush.
First of all, as a member of the Christian-right, I care much more about what Rove accomplished than what he actually believes. And, despite Rove's above mentioned failures, I do have to commend Bush/Rove for two excellent supreme court appointments and the end of legalized-infanticide, a.k.a. "partial-birth-abortion." Plus three-points on the Christian-right score board.
In any event, attacking a person's religious beliefs is a low-blow and certainly does not square against the supposed image of journalistic integrity that Moyers purports to having. Especially when such an attack is false. But that's exactly what Moyers did with Rove in the recent television
Now, without further ado, a video montage showing just show wrong Moyers was to make such comments, and how wrong he was on his facts. (Also, will played, Chris Wallace.) :
Two final items.
One, per Moyers' letter to Wallace, statements like "version of reality is undermined" have NO business in serious journalism. Once you invoke phrases about a persons "version of reality" you are no longer reporting facts. Rather, you've made ideological judgments that you are simply spinning as "journalism."
Two, it's good to see that PBS's own Ombudsman's is also taking Moyers to task on these obnoxious comments about Rove. Some of the better letters the Ombudsman received:
Bill Moyers is, as they say in the south, losing his “religion.” This is a bitter and totally off base journalist. The latest salvo was his commentary on Karl Rove. What creditability he held in the past has run dry.
- Gary Clower, Narvon, PA
My question is should a public TV station allow such one sided critique of Bush and Rove? In the past I never heard any one sided critique of Pres. Clinton. I am offended by this for I look to public TV as one place an individual can be told facts without a man’s personal bias so blatantly expressed. I ask PBS to look into this matter and advise me how this will be changed in the future. I do not want my tax dollars used to express any individual’s biased point of view. We get enough of this on regular TV broadcasts.
- Patricia Sommerkamp, Crestview Hills, KY
My wife and I watch PBS more than any other network, having 3 stations in our area from which to choose. I am appalled at the sloppy, rude, arrogant, and inaccurate nature of Bill Moyers’ nasty commentary upon Karl Rove’s resignation. Moyers played loosely with the facts, or with no facts at all. I appreciate objective journalism that deals with all sides of issues, but I deplore the tone and nastiness of Moyers’ diatribe about Rove and the President. For a man who once worked for a President, he shows amazing immaturity and very lazy research habits about the facts. He is embarrassing to those of us who revel in the wonderful programs on PBS.
- Richard Palmer, Springboro, OH