Posted on 07/16/2003 8:32:04 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay
NBC's Today on Tuesday brought aboard Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy and Republican Senator Richard Shelby to separately discuss the evidence for going to war against Iraq, but while Kennedy got plenty of time to say what he wanted, partially because he just kept talking, Shelby received a third of the time, in part because Katie Couric took more time posing questions to him than he used to answer them.
Couric challenged Shelby with lengthy questions in which she laid out the attacks on the Bush administration, including taking nearly a minute to read from a hostile New York Times editorial. But with Kennedy, she tossed up softballs, such as: "What is the most upsetting thing to you about the way this whole episode has unfolded?" And: "Senator Kennedy let me get back, if I could though, for a minute to the charges or allegations that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to justify the invasion against Iraq. What, in your view, should be done about that?"
MRC analyst Geoffrey Dickens timed the July 15 session and discovered:
-- Total time of Katie Couric's questions to Ted Kennedy: 47 seconds
-- Total time of Ted Kennedy's responses: 3 minutes, 41 seconds
-- Total time of Couric's questions to Richard Shelby: 1 minute, 53 seconds
-- Total time of Richard Shelby's responses: 1 minute, 32 seconds
Couric set up the segment: "On Monday the President defended U.S. intelligence and he said the U.S. made the right decision to go to war against Iraq. Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and Republican Senator Richard Shelby is former Vice Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Gentlemen, good morning. Senator Kennedy let me, let me start with you if I could."
Couric's 12 second "question" to Kennedy, more like a cuing up: "In the past week we've seen a, a firestorm erupt over this assertion that President Bush made during the State of the Union address. What is the most upsetting thing to you about the way this whole episode has unfolded?"
Kennedy consumed 1:34 with his response.
Couric's second question took 8 seconds: "Why do you think the administration has been reluctant to go to NATO or the United Nations to form a more international coalition in Iraq right now?"
Kennedy took 53 seconds to respond.
Couric used 13 seconds for her third inquiry: "Senator Kennedy let me get back, if I could though, for a minute to the charges or allegations that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence to justify the invasion against Iraq. What, in your view, should be done about that?"
Kennedy's reply consumed 38 seconds before Couric took a second to try to interject, "But in closing Senator," before Kennedy carried on for another 13 seconds.
For her fourth question, Couric used 13 seconds: "We only have a few seconds left unfortunately but how do you get to the bottom of this, Senator Kennedy, without politicizing it too much? Obviously the Democratic presidential hopefuls have seized upon this, this episode and are using it to their political advantage."
Kennedy took 21 seconds to answer.
Couric moved to Shelby, starting with a 30-second challenge: "Now let's turn to Senator Richard Shelby. Senator Shelby I guess the basic question is why did the President include this assertion about Niger in his State of the Union address when CIA Director George Tenet advised the White House to drop the reference when the President gave a speech in Cincinnati, in October, which was a few months before the State of the Union in January 28. And when Secretary of State Colin Powell felt so uncomfortable with the information he didn't even use it during his presentation to the United Nations. Can you understand why this has raised some eyebrows?"
Shelby took barely longer to respond as his answer lasted 38 seconds.
Couric used 17 seconds for her second inquiry: "But Senator Shelby, this, but, but the CIA, George Tenet did tell the, the White House not to use it in October. Is it George, but, but is it, is it his fault or the White House's fault if they kept in, in January after he had already warned them that it was inaccurate information?"
In this instance Shelby used less time to respond, just 14 seconds.
Couric went on for nearly a full minute -- 52 seconds -- in her third question, one in the form of a lecture: "Let me ask you about an editorial entitled 'Uranium Quicksand' in the New York Times today. It says, 'the British made us do it defense,' because as you know the administration is citing British intelligence as the reason for including this in the State of the Union address. 'The British made us do it defense might by more compelling if London had a better track record when it came to assessing Iraq's unconventional weapons programs. In fact, parts of the British dossier on Iraq's arms that was published with great fanfare in February were lifted verbatim from unsubstantiated internet sources. Prime Minister Tony Blair's warning, last September that frontline Iraqi military forces could launch chemical or biological weapons on short notice proved to be embarrassingly misinformed once the war in Iraq began.' What do you think about the White House's actions in terms of basically saying the British, that British intelligence justify the inclusion of this assertion in the State of the Union address?"
After all of that, Shelby dispensed with her concern in a mere 20 seconds.
Couric took 18 seconds for her fourth and last inquiry, not counting the time for the Bush clip she played: "There are new questions now about the second accusation President Bush made about Iraq's pursuit of nuclear weapons in this year's State of the Union address. Let's listen and then we'll discuss it. [George W. Bush clip] Now if these tubes, Senator Shelby, were not part of a nuclear weapons program the intelligence turns out to, to be dubious. Is this a pattern of deception by the Bush administration in your view?"
Shelby's answer lasted a succinct 20 seconds.
She's the one female on the planet for whom I would let the "C" word slip out if I encountered her...she's the one female I use the word against regularly. She's the one female other than Hitlery to whom it most applies.
She's a smarmy, lying, whining c--- and I hate the perky snot's guts. F- her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.