CBS News/Couric/Schieffer Smear Sarah Palin

As the months pass it is obvious that the Left in this country is scared to death of Sarah Palin.

Perhaps never before in modern history has the leftwing mainstream media, the Democratic Party, and the 'ruling class' of the political elite so thoroughly attempted to discredit, smear, and ruin a candidate for public office.

CBS News has been relentless in its smear campaign against Palin.

But when Bob Schieffer congratulated Katie Couric on her ambush of Palin during her interviews, for me that was the absolute last straw.

Schieffer was droning on about how Palin proved to be a 'lightweight,' a 'drag on the ticket,' and 'a poor choice for a Vice-Presidential running mate.'

None of this, of course, is true.

But when he said the following, I came completely unglued, particularly when I heard Couric's response.

Said Schieffer, 'And frankly, Katie, I say this not because you are sitting here, but the interview you did with Sarah Palin was the turning point in showing the nation the truth about Sarah Palin and the fact that she is unfit to be Vice President.'

Couric smile and stated, 'Ohhh, thank-you!'

Wow.

Schieffer just congratulated Couric on her ambush-smear of Sarah Palin, and Couric is proud of herself for having done so!

The fact of the matter is that the Couric interview with Palin did NOT show the real Sarah Palin. She was sorely mismanaged by inept McCain campaign staffers who should have never put her in front of the anti-conservative Katie Couric.

The real Sarah Palin is the Alaska Governor who enjoyed the highest approval rating of any Governor in the nation, at 80%. The real Sarah Palin is the one who stood up to her own Party, routed out corruption, and faced down the oil companies.

And we saw the real Sarah Palin on the stump drawing massive crowds that rivaled that of Obama, though it was rarely reported in the mainstream media.

I am through with CBS News, Katie Couric, and Bob Schieffer. I can't even stand to look at them or hear their voices. They grate on my nerves.

But this is true with the mainstream media in general.

Thus, I won't even watch them anymore even to provide a critique. I choose to get my news from real reporters who are unbiased. I will NOT get my news from hacks who slant news in favor of one political candidate, and then smear another candidate out of the fear that she may actually be a threat to Obama in 2012.

And believe me, if the gang of thugs who now run the country, including their cheerleaders in the mainstream media, were not frightened out of their wits by Sarah Palin, you can rest assured they would not be conducting this coordinated smear campaign.

And that includes members of John McCain's campaign staff.

Another Couric/CBS News Hit Piece on Palin

Under the guise of doing a 'fact-check,' Katie Couric and CBS News ran a piece Tuesday evening on Sarah Palin and her claim that she stopped construction on the 'bridge to nowhere' in Alaska.

The bridge had been a Congressional earmark secured for Alaska by one of its U.S. Senators, Ted Stevens. Early on, Palin had supported the project, as she had Stevens.

But as Palin began to discover the corruption within Alaska politics after she became Governor of the state, the bridge to nowhere was one project that she decided to stop.

There is no corruption in supporting something that you think is legit and then changing your mind once you discover 'it ain't legit.'

CBS News, however, spun the story on Palin to suggest that she only put a halt to the bridge when she found out how unpopular it was...right at the last minute, before being selected to run as John McCain's running mate.

Perhaps we should do a 'fact-check' on CBS News.

The CBS spin is clearly FALSE. The facts are that Palin supported Ted Stevens early on and the bridge as well. Then she ran for Governor. Once elected she began a systematic campaign to rid Alaska of corruption in politics.

When she embarked on this gargantuan crusade, some discoveries were made that were hard to swallow. First, she discovered that Ted Stevens, although a Republican, had engaged in some rather underhanded dealings with Alaskan businesses, one of which was the construction firm that began building the 'bridge to nowhere.'

The money for the pork-barrel project had already been sent to Alaska long before Palin was elected Governor.

Once she became aware of the corruption involved in the Stevens scheme concerning the bridge, Palin called a halt to the construction, but kept the money for Alaska to spend on much-needed highway and infrastructure projects.

Thus, the bridge to nowhere was nixed and legitimate projects got the money.

Couric and CBS News conveniently failed to mention the timeline involved in the Palin campaign to rid Alaskan politics of corruption, and what it cost her personally to go up against powerful people in her own Party, such as Stevens.

And they certainly never mentioned the fact that a pork barrel project that was knee-deep in corruption was stopped cold while worthwhile, legitimate projects in the state got a boost.

It would seem that CBS News is in dire need of a 'facts-check' whenever it does a 'facts-check' segment on Palin and McCain.

But then, we all know already that Katie and her cohorts are in the tank for Obama. So what else can we expect?

Katie Couric, CBS News Trash Sarah Palin

The tone was clearly negative. The intent was to create questions and doubt not only about Sarah Palin but about John McCain's 'decision-making' in choosing her as his running mate. The display was tabloid 'journalism' at its worst, although one can hardly describe this news segment as journalism.

Katie Couric and CBS News on Tuesday evening descended to the garbage bin of news reporting, trashing GOP Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin primarily because she had the audacity to raise a teenager who is pregnant out of wedlock.

Couric further trashed Palin by claiming that she is not the maverick politician she claims to be because she once supported Ted Stevens. So what? Most Americans have supported politicians at one time or another who turned out to be charlatans. The fact that Palin went after Stevens and his good ole boy network is proof positive that she is not afraid of attacking corruption in her own Party once she discovers the corruption.

But the CBS smear-piece didn't stop there.

Couric stated that once, way back in 1994 or so, Palin had actually attended the convention of the Alaskan Independence Party, which at one time supported Alaska's secession from the Union. Well, whoop-tee-dooooo!!

Nevermind that Couric failed to tell the rest of the story.

Palin has been a lifelong member of the Republican Party, and the GOP has her registration papers to prove it. She never joined the secession movement nor the Alaskan Independence Party. She never even spoke in favor of the Party's objectives.

Barack Obama spoke at the annual meeting of Moveon.org, one of the most Leftist, subversive groups in America. But naturally Couric never reported it. Obama, Biden, Edwards, Clinton, Richardson, ALL of the Democratic presidential candidates went to the Moveon.org meeting and spoke on their stage.

But Americans never heard about it from the likes of Couric and her partisan Leftwing cohorts in the mainstream media.

Amazingly enough, however, this still is not all.

CBS News showed the picture and gave the name of the young man who is the purported father of the baby Sarah Palin's daughter is carrying.

Let me give just a personal word to Katie Couric and CBS News in particular, but to NBC, ABC, and CNN in general: you all are nothing but trash who engage in trash journalism. In fact, you have presided over the death of real journalism in America. Go to hell. You are completely irrelevant along with the New York Times and the Washington Post.

CBS NEWS HATCHETS UP MCCAIN CAMPAIGN

It becomes more obvious with each passing week that the MSM is in the tank for Obama. No greater example can be found than tonight's broadcast of the CBS (Cheerleading for Barack System) Evening News.

Katie Couric's lead story is about John McCain's new ad which compares the rock-star type worship of Barack Obama to infamous Hollywood starlets such as Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and others.

It is a legitimate criticism, and much of it Obama has brought on himself.

But Couric referred to the McCain tactics as 'the low road,' echoing the sentiments of Barack Obama himself.

And then she brings on Bob Schieffer to parrot that line, calling the McCain ad 'silly' and 'weird.'

Schieffer ended his segment by these ominous words, 'McCain is not getting any traction at all, and with this latest ad it is hard to see how anyone will take that seriously.'

Wow. No traction? What about poll after poll that shows McCain gaining on Obama in many of the battleground states where the Democrat has been ahead? What about the latest Gallup and Rasmussen polls showing that among likely voters, McCain is up by 4 over Obama?

I have a message for Katie and Bob. It's hard for us out in the American heartland to take YOU seriously.

News Bias:Couric/CBS Adopt Strategy of Obama

As former Democratic National Committee Chair Terry McAuliff stated recently, 'There is no doubt that the mainstream media is in the tank for Obama.'

This happens to be one of the few times McAuliff has been completely honest in his entire political career.

As if reading from a script written by Howard Dean, the Democratic National Committee, and the Barack Obama campaign, Katie Couric began Thursday's CBS Evening News with the headline that 'Republicans deliver a double-pronged attack against Barack Obama.'

Actually they did absolutely no such thing. But Barack Obama claims they did. Funny how in these instances the guilty party shouts first and shouts the loudest.

Here is the series of events to led to the Couric/CBS News smear of the GOP, in chronological order.

President Bush had traveled to Israel to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the creation of the Jewish nation in their native land. In the President's prepared remarks before the Israeli Knesset, Mr. Bush described those who propose negotiating with terrorists and state sponsors of terror as appeasement-driven.

He also compared them to those who advocated appeasement with Adolf Hitler even as the dictator conducted his bloody scourge throughout Europe prior to WW II.

Winston Churchill had to contend with such appeasement-driven boneheads in the British Parliament in the years leading up to the Nazi attack against Great Britain. There, too, British politicians such as Prime Minister Chamberlain advocated 'sitting down and talking to Hitler.'

Chamberlain did exactly that, returning home to London with a treaty signed by Hitler himself.

Churchill was not impressed.

And, as Churchill had warned, no sooner had the ink dried on the treaty than Hitler had done precisely what he agreed not to do. He invaded Poland. Great Britain had a treaty with Poland in which they agreed to come to Poland's defense if they were attacked. Thus, Britain was automatically thrust into the middle of war.

From the very beginning there have been voices within the U.S. Government, particularly within the Congress, who have advocated policies of appeasement with terrorist states. John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, and a host of other Democrats in Congress have urged the President to sit down at the negotiating table with Iran, Iranian President Mahmood Ahmadinejad, and the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Thus, the concept is nothing new.

But one would have thought that the President had fired the first shot in World War III if one listens exclusively to the mainstream media. Immediately Barack Obama was all over the television news networks, claiming that Bush had attacked him personally in his speech in Israel.

Why would Obama think that Bush had singled him out when there are many others who have advocated appeasement among the Democrats?

Obama did nothing but 'out' himself as one of the guilty parties. As the presumptive Democratic nominee he has consistently advocated 'sitting down at the negotiating table' with terrorist thugs and goons who kill people either because they are not Muslim or because they support Israel.

Thus, Obama was the first to yell. But soon he was joined by his partners in crime, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, and Dick Durbin, among others. They decried and condemned the Bush comments, referring to them as 'beneath the dignity of the office of the President,' and other such nonsense.

In what way did he disparage the office of President? By telling the truth? By reminding Israel that there are those within the U.S. Government who are just as naive and shortsighted as Chamberlain and British politicians before WW II?

This information is of vital concern to Israel's very survival in a dangerous area of the world where they are overwhelmingly outnumbered 99-to-1.

These facts were apparently lost on Couric and company at CBS, who proceeded to read the Democratic playbook word-for-word as they described these events. The very fact that Couric stated that Obama had been 'attacked' by Republicans gave one the impression that he was ganged up on by a group of attack dogs.

And within Obama's strategy for winning the White House is the tactic of making sure it is always inappropriate to criticize him in any way, and in this case, even when they don't intend to. Attacking Obama automatically makes one mean and racist.

And the mainstream media, particularly Couric and CBS News, have bought it hook, line, and sinker.

But this is not all.

The second part of the supposed 'two-pronged attack against Obama' occurred when a CBS reporter asked Republican Presidential candidate John McCain about Bush's remarks and Obama's claims.

McCain correctly mused that it is always a mistake to negotiate with terrorists and that Obama's suggestion to that effect shows his naivete and inexperience. Again, McCain spoke nothing but absolute truth.

Thus, CBS News' template for doing a smear job against Republicans, Bush, and McCain was in place.

Nothing the President said was untrue. Nothing he said did anything but confirm common knowledge about the policy proposals for the Middle East that do, indeed, emphasize appeasement. He never mentioned Barack Obama by name. But it was Obama who seized it and made it all about him.

And not only did CBS News take the Obama script and use it, but they also baited John McCain to respond, not so much to the President's speech, but to Barack Obama's response. And this supposedly amounted to a two-pronged Republican attack against Obama, although the 'second prong' was initiated by a CBS News reporter.

Perhaps Obama, Pelosi, Biden, Kerry, Kennedy, and Durbin should do some serious soul-searching. Their vitriolic responses to the President's words show that those words hit a raw nerve.

And so, ladies and gentlemen of surrender and appeasement, if the shoe fits, wear it. Don't try to make this about Bush when he was merely accurately reporting facts. If you support sitting down at the negotiating table with terrorists who are known to lie and say anything to further their agenda, then say so. We all already know you support these things anyway.

Clinton Ladies Intervention Team Strikes Again

The Clinton Ladies Intervention Team, the name coined by columnist Monica Crowley to designate Mrs. Clinton's hit squad that is charged with the task of planting questions at opponent's news conferences and debates, as well as coordinate the vast network news machine controlled by Hillary, has been quite busy since the candidate was booed in Iowa on Saturday.

As expected, the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team jumped into high gear following a disastrous question-and-answer session by phone that the candidate had with Iowa voters.

The weather was so bad that Clinton was forced to cancel her appearance, but she took questions by phone. The crowd booed the candidate at least four or five times during her brief session with them.

Mrs. Clinton made no friends and may well have created some enemies when she answered questions on illegal aliens. She made it clear she supports a 'path to citizenship' for illegals, enabling them to circumvent the legal process that millions of others went through, thus catapulting them to the head of the line, in front of those seeking LEGAL citizenship.

The candidate also stated that she would seek to accomplish this along with the Democrat-controlled Congress within her first 100 days in office.

The boos began to crescendo until by the time the candidate hung up the phone, very loud boos were heard from the audience.

Thus, today it was the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team to the rescue.

CBS News and Katie Couric practically joined the team today as not only did they fail to show Mrs. Clinton's disastrous question-and-answer session in Iowa on Saturday but they took pains to show her in a very friendly crowd today, as the candidate coincidentally proceeded to take swipes at the Bush Administration.

In addition, Clinton got loads of free publicity, compliments of Couric and Company, when the Evening News did a segment on 'attempting to get the youth vote.' Here again, the segment coincidentally focused almost exclusively on the Democrats rather than Republicans, although the segment was designed to show the importance of youth to BOTH Parties.

But guess who got most of the airtime in the segment? You guess it--Hillary Rodham Clinton.

In fact, Couric and Company broadcast a key quote from Mrs. Clinton as she stated, 'The youth and their future is what this campaign is all about.'

If one is paying attention merely to the pictorial symbols and not the spin-verbiage that Couric used to mislead viewers concerning the nature of the piece, it is clear that the network wished for viewers to take with them two powerful images and thoughts--one, only Democrats are concerned about the youth of America, and two, it is Mrs. Clinton who has fashioned her entire campaign around youth and their future.

As if we didn't already know, we are now assured with proof positive that Couric and CBS News are part of the Clinton Ladies Intervention Team.

Ignoring the IGNORE-amuses

Ignoramuses come a dime a dozen. But since when has it become standard practice to put them on TV on every major network, including Fox, to provide political commentary?

To be frank, I have sworn off the entire lot of them, and that includes Fox's Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and all the rest. Granted, they are not nearly as bad as CBS, NBC, ABC, or the Clinton News Network (CNN), but Fox nonetheless has started standing on my last good nerve.

We have known for quite some time that Fox has been promoting Rudy Giuliani. Rupert Murdock has seen to that. Thus, we can overlook the sometimes not-so-subtle manner in which Fox pushes the candidate.

But the thing that is entirely unacceptable is for conservative commentators such as Hannity and O'Reilly to practically place every single instinct they have on the back burner in order to place Giuliani at the forefront of their starry-eyed gaze.

Both of them know better.

But the absolute last straw was when attorney and Fox commentator Monica Crowley, for whom we normally have utmost respect, states that Giuliani and ROMNEY are the two front-runners, and that Huckabee is a possibility.

Never once did Crowley mention Fred Thompson, who is in a national statistical dead-head for the front-runner position with Rudy among GOP voters who are extremely likely to vote in the primaries.

It is as if Thompson isn't even there.

Are these commentators such hopeless ignoramuses that they are totally unaware of the polls, or is it that they have simply sold out heart, soul, body, and mind to Rupert Murdock?

It is too late to make amends for these near-unforgivable mistakes. I have hit the ignore button on the ignoramuses. And unless Fox somehow redeems itself, they are history in my book, just like CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN.

Unfortunately, I happened to inadvertently catch Katie Couric's interview with Rudy Giuliani, during which she went after the Mayor with a vengeance in spite of the fact that in her interview with the Queen of Sleaze, the Hildabeast, she acted as if she were so awe-struck that she could give Mrs. Clinton a bear-hug at any moment.

Here again, Couric referred to only Giuliani and Romney as the 'front-runners,' while waxing eloquent over the fact that Mike Huckabee seems to be 'coming on strong.'

No mention of Fred Thompson being in a statistical tie with Rudy.

So, is Fox now using the very same template as CBS?

It seems odd that within the very same week both Fox and CBS would speak of the GOP candidates in the very same fashion, with the exception that CBS obviously is in the Clinton camp while Fox is in the Giuliani camp.

I try very hard not to watch network news broadcasts anymore. The frustration level involved in the endeavor far outweighs anything to be gained. Yet it is important to know what the talking heads are doing and saying.

Unfortunately, I now have to add Fox to that list of the ignoramuses, about which I am too curious to totally ignore, after all.

CBS's Anti-GOP Machine At It Again

If one had listened to the CBS Evening News totally at face value Saturday evening, one would think that the GOP is the one political party in America that is synonymous with scandal, corruption, hypocrisy, and graft.

Ever since we at The Liberty Sphere have taken it upon ourselves to do a periodic reality check on CBS News, highlighting examples of bias, we have discovered that often one has to be most diligent on the weekends when viewership is lower.

This is particularly true with the evening news broadcasts on Saturday and Sunday, as well as the flagship news magazine '60 Minutes.'

It is during these times that often CBS News will slip in some of its most blatantly slanted news stories.

Such was the case Saturday evening. In reporting the resignation of Idaho Senator Larry Craig, CBS News proceeded to do a hatchet job--the 2nd this week--on the Republican Party. During the segment on Craig, the reporter stated that the GOP has a 'brand problem,' that the Republican Party is a 'weakened brand,' and that going into the 2008 election cycle the Party is at a distinct disadvantage with the voters because of 'all of the scandals and corruption' involving Republicans over the past few years.

The very same hatchet job was done earlier in the week, as we reported here on The Liberty Sphere.

And once again, the reporter went down the list naming each Republican over the past four years who has been involved in scandals of one kind or another, never once mentioning the fact that Democrats have been knee-deep in corruption of their own making.

The fact that Larry Craig was 'caught' in a sex sting operation, which the police and the government have no business delving into to begin with, only serves to emphasize Democratic hypocrisy. The very party that claims that the government should stay out of the private lives of Americans, particularly their private sex lives, is the first to condemn Republicans such as Craig.

But of course, as long as the Democrats can keep the story of Larry Craig and those dirty rotten scoundrel Republicans at the top of the news, they can slip underneath the radar screen when it comes to Hillary Clinton's five-year relationship with a major fundraiser who was wanted in the state of California for committing crimes.

It turns out that this particular fundraiser had contributed mega-bucks not only to Clinton, but to Barack Obama, Barbara Boxer, and at least a half-dozen other Democrats.

Attempting to escape any blame or association with corruption, the Democrats who were involved in this dirty money scandal did what they always do when they are caught with their pants down--they 'give the money back,' or in this case 'give it to charity.'

My, what precious angels.

This is precisely what Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, did when it came to light he had received illegal campaign funds. He gave the money back, and this supposedly made the illegal activity null and void.

Is this how we as a society treat, say, embezzlers, for example? As long as they 'give the money' back they are automatically absolved of any wrongdoing? I don't think so.

John Conyers, Democratic chair of the House Judiciary Committee, 'promised not to do it again' when it came to light he had broken federal campaign laws.

How do you think you would fare as an ordinary citizen if this were your only defense after being arrested for breaking a federal law? 'Your Honor, I promise I won't do it again if you let me go free and drop the charges.' Yeah, right.

And as for Democrats Dianne Feinstein and William Jefferson, who clearly had their hands soiled with dirty money, little or nothing is being done by the Democratic leadership to address the obvious corruption exhibited by both.

After all, it is the GOP that is the Party of corruption. Any factual information that proves otherwise or doesn't fit the template set by the Democratic Party and the mainstream media must be pushed aside.

The present playbook of the Democrats and their mouthpieces at CBS News and the other networks has George Soros, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, and the Congressional Democratic leadership written all over it.

As soon as the Democrats took control of Congress in November of 2006, this playbook was put together. Inside sources in the Congress reported that the Democratic leadership would immediately launch into a massive media blitz involving countless Congressional investigations into 'GOP corruption.'

The objective would be to so bury the Bush White House and the Republican Party with an endless barrage of charges of corruption that the GOP would go limping into the 2008 general election, leaving the Democrats with a decisive advantage.

Not only has the Democratic leadership followed through with that strategy, but they have successfully enlisted the help of their allies in the mainstream media to bombard the American public with the message, 'Those Republicans are sleazy, but those Democrats are clean.'

My friends, if you believe those Democrats are clean, then you have tweety birds and tooth fairies flying around in your head.

Couric/CBS Goes Bonkers Over Craig Scandal

Katie Couric and the CBS Evening News went bonkers over the Craig scandal, showing a graphic containing pictures of all of the Republicans in Congress who have been implicated in scandals over the past several years.

Never has CBS done a similar thing to highlight Democrats in Congress who have been implicated in scandals. And there have been plenty.

As most Liberty Sphere readers know by now, from time to time we do a quick survey of what and how news gets reported on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric. Couric's years at the NBC Today Show solidified her credentials as one of the most liberal talking heads in the business.

And with the new evening news producer, who made a name for himself at CNN as one of the most unreliable, biased, and agenda-driven news producers in the business, we wanted to see just how far CBS would go to slant the news it presents on its evening broadcast.

Rarely has CBS News given a fair shake to Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, and others who adhere to traditional American values. A perfect case in point is the Craig scandal.

When Couric reported the news that Senator Craig from Idaho had pleaded guilty to a lesser charge in an airport bathroom sting operation, the graphic shown behind her contained the pictures of all of the Republicans in recent years who have had their difficulties with scandal.

Yet when Democratic Congressman William Jefferson was caught with $90,000 in cold cash in his freezer, along with charges that he peddled his influence in Congress to benefit foreign governments--for a price, of course--there were no graphics or pictures of all of the Democrats who have been implicated in scandal over the past few years.

And the names of these Democrats read like a Who's Who among the most powerful and influential persons in Washington--Harry Reid, John Conyers, Dianne Feinstein, John Murtha, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi.

In fact, not a single outlet of the mainstream media even bothered to mention that Dianne Feinstein engaged in awarding lucrative government contracts to her husband's businesses--a practice that directly benefited Feinstein and her husband, which is against the law.

This major scandal was swept under the rug by the Democratic leadership in Congress and the mainstream media. The closest the story ever came to being reported in a major media outlet was when the Capitol Hill newsletter called 'The Hill' ran the story a couple of months ago.

Does this excuse Senator Craig's hypocrisy and behavior? No way. But it does provide yet one more example of how the liberal mainstream media machine attempts to portray Republicans as those dastardly poor examples of ethics while casting the Democrats as the innocent little angels.

Perhaps, though, the public simply isn't buying it. With public approval of the Democratic-controlled Congress at the all-time low of just 16%, maybe the public has wised up to the underhanded, slanted tactics of CBS, ABC, NBC, and CNN to sway voters with one-sided news stories.

All I can say is, it's about time.

Katie Couric-CBS News' Spin of Attorney Firings

Charlotte, NC (TLS). As much as one would like to say that the slanted and downright dishonest journalism at CBS News is an isolated phenomenon, unfortunately the practices one observes being utilized by Katie Couric and CBS News is but one small example of a widespread problem in television news on the three major networks.

Couric and the brass at CBS News have pulled another fast one on the public by claiming that the actions of the Bush Administration in firing eight U.S. Prosecutors is 'unprecedented.'

Not only did Couric use the term 'unprecedented' to describe the dismissals, but she turned to a CBS News' legal advisor/reporter, who again stated that the firings were 'unprecedented.'

All of this was done, of course, to support the charges of ethically-challenged Democrats and Little Chucky Schumer that the firings were politically motivated.

The problem is that Couric's description of the actions of Attorney-General Alberto Gonzalez in dismissing the attorneys is simply not true. CBS News lied. Katie Couric lied. The firings are anything BUT 'unprecedented.'

Let me refresh the memories of the CBS producers and their anchor for just a moment. In 1993, President Bill Clinton summarily fired every single one of the U.S. Prosecutors in the Justice Department--all 93 of them.

In addition, the one and only reason that Clinton, via Attorney-General Janet Reno, fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys was purely a political one. Clinton wanted his own people in those positions, period. One of the fired prosecutors in particular was investigating the shady dealings of the Clintons in Arkansas and replaced by a Clinton crony.

Thus, the charge that Bush fired eight U.S. Attorneys 'for political purposes' seems rather disingenuous, hollow, and hypocritical coming from Democrats and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media. When are these dismissals ever NOT 'political?'

The 93 attorneys that Clinton and Reno dismissed had done no wrong. There was no stain on their performance. None had been accused of failing to accomplish the task to which they were assigned. Yet Clinton fired every last one of them.

So, the question becomes, why did Katie Couric and CBS News conveniently fail to report the 1993 Clinton Administration massacre of U.S. Attorneys while describing the dismissal of only 8 attorneys by the Bush Administration as 'unprecedented?'

If Couric and CBS News defend their actions by claiming that 1993 was different because a new President is expected to make changes in political appointments, then they will have done nothing but prove that the recent firing of eight is nothing unusual at all. They are POLITICAL APPOINTEES that serve at the discretion of the President.

Thus, if Clinton could dismiss all 93 attorneys in 1993 for political reasons which we grant to all Presidents, then what is the problem with Bush's firing 8 of these attorneys for political reasons?

Despite the cries of the dismissed attorneys and their defenders in claiming that prosecutors for the U.S. government should be 'free from the politics of Washington,' the fact of the matter is that without the political appointments they received, they would never have gotten those jobs at all. The very positions they hold are 'political' appointments and always have been.

In addition, invariably, story after story is beginning to slowly emerge as we find out more about the eight who were fired--stories that indicate these particular attorneys failed to perform a few crucial aspects of their jobs. In Washington State, for example, the U.S. Attorney failed to file a request for a recount of a very close and hotly contested race in that state. Others failed to expedite the investigations of widespread corruption and illegal activity on the part of some high-profile Democrats who so far have not only gotten away with their crimes but sit in powerful offices within the new Congress.

It is clear, therefore, that the eight prosecutors in question were negligent in performing their duty and needed to go.

In fact, there are more who need to go for different reasons, such as Johnny Sutton, who so far has succeeded in making a name for himself as perhaps the most corrupt attorney in the federal government.

However, CBS News and Katie Couric have been negligent in their duties to fully inform the public of all the pertinent facts in a story. Their statement that the firing of eight attorneys is 'unprecedented' is not only a lie, but it hides a basic truth that Clinton and company did far worse in firing all 93. And once again, CBS News has shown itself to be nothing more than a 30-minute advertisement for the Democrat Party.

Bring on the fairness doctrine!

Leftwing Activist New Head of CBS News

Washington, DC (TLS). The Katie Couric Show on CBS News has a new boss. With Katie's plummeting ratings, the brass at CBS decided that something drastic had to be done to save Couric's neck. After all, she is one of the highest paid talking heads in all of television.

Surely nothing that Couric has done would cause such a mass exodus of viewers.

The fall guy, therefore, was her former boss, Rome Hartman, executive producer of the show, who himself had been no detached, unbiased purveyor of truth. CBS News is more like a half-hour ad for the Democrat Party than a news broadcast. And, as we have shown on The Liberty Sphere, Couric herself is such an unabashed Liberal that she has been a willing co-conspirator in this blatant slanting of news stories. Her years at NBC's Today Show further prove the point, as we have documented.

But guess who is now Couric's new executive producer? None other than Bill Clinton crony Rick Kaplan. Kaplan's cozy relationship with the Clintons is well-known. He even helped the former President with his image problem in the media when Clinton was being hit with the scandals of Monica Lewinsky and his subsequent impeachment.

Kaplan's work for Clinton was done while he was presiding over CNN.

Does this surprise anyone?

Kaplan also headed MSNBC. In his work for both CNN and MSNBC, Kaplan presided over consistently slanted news stories and programs that favored Democrats.

Interestingly, he was fired from both networks.

Now he winds up at CBS News with a decidedly Liberal anchor as we approach one of the most pivotal election cycles in the history of the Republic. George Soros must be doing cartwheels. He could not even buy such a beautiful scenario in which news is consistently slanted to favor Democrats and trash Republicans leading up to the 2008 election.

As we have observed many times, the big four networks, CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN are all in the hip-pocket of Liberal Democrats. Yet this gang of thugs claims we need a 'fairness doctrine' so that they can get equal time on conservative talk radio.

I will repeat my former challenge to these numbskulls. Bring back the fairness doctrine. Get your equal time on conservative talk radio. And then we will demand equal time to answer Couric, Gibson, and all the rest on the big four TV networks.

Liberal Democrats have gotten free air time on the major network news programs for over 40 years--40 years' worth of blatant, in-your-face bias in favor of every Liberal program and politician to come down the pike. If they want equal time on conservative talk radio, then we will mount a campaign to demand equal time to answer Couric's bias--and that of all of her competitors on the other networks.

Oh, by the way, we will want that during prime time, on CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN.

Is it a deal?

Katie Couric, Al Gore, and the 'Greens'

Washington, DC (TLS). An unexpected turn has been taken by The Liberty Sphere of late, as we have inadvertently discovered just how deep and systemic is the Leftist slant and outright bias of Katie Couric and CBS News. The Liberty Sphere was the first to blow the whistle on Couric and CBS's outright dishonest news reporting concerning a poll that supposedly showed a 53% majority of Americans that either want to withdraw funding from the War in Iraq or deny funds for the troop surge.

As we pointed out, Couric and CBS, using a deceptive slight-of-hand maneuver with the poll numbers, twisted the results to say something they actually did not say at all.

Since that episode of the Couric propaganda fiction report on CBS, The Liberty Sphere has been watching the program very closely for more instances of Liberal bias.

We found it yet again on Monday evening.

Couric's lead story Monday evening was the buy-out of a Texas coal mining company by a corporation known for its 'green' sensitivity. Supposedly this was earth-shattering news, in a manner of speaking, since this is reportedly the first time an environmentalist-friendly company has bought out one of the dark, evil, and sinister companies that produce energy, heat, and cooling for most Americans by the use of fossil fuels.

The dreaded fossil fuels, of course, are the main reason the earth is warming, according to the Leftist propaganda of extremist environmentalist activists who wish to dismantle American free enterprise, capitalism, and individual freedom in the name of 'saving the environment.'

No matter that most of the good science that is based upon actual observable fact and a non-biased approach to considering the earth's climate history show no such thing.

Yet here again is Couric and CBS spouting their slanted 'news' in favor of those propagandists who wish to lay the blame for global warming squarely at the feet of mankind, so that government can then launch the single biggest attack on human freedom in the history of the world.

But this was not enough.

Couric's second story of the evening piggy-backed on the lead story about the Texas buy-out. This story, not surprisingly, focused upon Al Gore's environmentalist extremist film and its selection to receive an Academy Award on Sunday evening. The film was not selected as best motion picture, and yet, it merited a prime spot on Couric's show.

No mention was made of the film that won best picture.

Gore's hook, line, and sinker approach to the 'man-is-to-blame-for-global-warming' mantra has earned him the accolades of Hollywood, the European Union, Socialists, Communists, and every other nut-case on the planet who would love to impose their brave new world on American society and rob the citizens of liberty. It is no wonder, therefore, that one of Gore's comrades at arms in this siege, i.e. Katie Couric, would give him prime billing as the second story of the night on Monday evening's news broadcast.

I am sure that billionaire atheist and Democrat operative George Soros was very proud.

The Liberty Sphere will continue to monitor Couric's reports at CBS. We may even launch this as a regular feature of The Liberty Sphere and call it 'the Couric Watch.' Our intent is not simply to inform our readers about the spin doctors at CBS News but to underscore and attempt to understand this fascinating phenomenon--the thorough indoctrination of the public by a major news organization.

So stay tuned. There will be much more to come.

More Spin From Katie Couric and CBS News

Washington, DC (TLS). CBS News has a long history of Leftist spin on its news stories, dating all the way back to Walter Cronkite's days as anchor. The bias only got worse with Dan Rather.

Now, Katie Couric and company have taken the news division at CBS to a new low in Leftist slant. Monday night's broadcast is a perfect case in point.

Couric introduced a story concerning the upcoming attempt of Congressional Democrats to pass a non-binding resolution against President Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq in order to stabilize the country. After a brief description of the Democrats' plan, she stated, 'The American people seem to want the Democrats to do much more than just a non-binding resolution.

'Our latest poll,' Couric continued, 'shows that 53% of Americans want the Democrats either to cut off funding for the war altogether, or refuse funding for the troop surge.'

However, the graphic she placed on the screen painted an entirely different picture when one considers the whole story and not just the spin. According to the poll graphic, 45% of those polled want Congress to refuse to fund the troop surge. 8% want Congress to withdraw funding from the War altogether.

Obviously, when the 45% is added to the 8%, you get a 53% 'majority' who either desire a withdrawal of funds from our troops on the ground in Iraq, or a blocking of funding for the upcoming troop surge.

This carefully calculated slight-of-hand gives the appearance of widespread public support for de-funding the War in Iraq. However, let's turn this around and use the same tactic Couric and CBS News uses, except this time, let's apply it to the OTHER side.

For example, if 45% of those polled want Congress to refuse to fund the troop surge, then that means that 55% of those polled either want the surge fully funded or are not sure about it one way or the other. In like manner, if only 8% of those polled want Congress to de-fund the War altogether, then that means a whopping 92% of those polled wish for the funding of the War to continue.

Once again, using the Couric/CBS slight-of-hand formula, when 55% is added to 92%, that means that fully 147% of Americans support funding the troop surge AND funding the War in general.

147 percent.

Remember, I am using the very same formula and tactic that CBS used to arrive at their so-called 53% majority who either favor de-funding the entire War or blocking funding for the troop surge. And the number I get is that 147 percent of Americans support funding for the War AND the troop surge.

This scenario reminds me of what an accountant for a major healthcare organization told me several years ago. He said, 'Numbers can be manipulated to show whatever result administration and the trustees are looking for. It is amazing as to how figures can be manipulated to show differing results based solely upon how they are put together.'

Apparently this is the modus operandi at CBS News.

Frankly, if this is the manner in which the major polling organizations are arriving at their conclusion that the vast majority of Americans are resigned to failure and defeat in Iraq, then I question the accuracy of those polls. Polls can be made to say just about anything you want them to say, especially when you have spin-doctors at work such as we have at CBS News.