Posted on 01/12/2002 7:10:08 AM PST by arete
I wonder how many times they will actually use the word "Democrat?" About none, would you say! I don't know if my blood pressure could stand a whole week of C-SPANs take on this, but I am curious. Other words to notice by their conspicuous absence will be:
Rubin, Goldman Sachs, Long Term Capital Fund, Ron Brown ---
Yes, it has been mentioned as a possibility. An economist I know very well whose specialty is fed-watching has told me that Greenspan wants Rubin to succeed him, and that, a month or two ago, the Bush administration was at least considering it. After Rubin's latest appearance alongside Daschle, I hope that the possibility has now been scuttled.
The Fed is very powerful. Greenspan still is in a position to embarrass Bush if he wants to. In fact, Greenspan's peculiar handling of the economy at the end of Bush Sr.'s term in office was probably responsible for Clinton's victory in 1992. "It's the Economy, Stupid!" Greenspan saw to it that the first Bush recovery came a month or two too late to do the incumbent president any good. Normally and traditionally, a fed chairman is expected to help out a sitting president with his timing of the business cycle, although Jimmy Carter probably lost his office because of a similar, deliberate mistiming twelve years earlier. Carter deserved it. His mismanagement of the economy was worthy of a banana republic.
So far, although his real sympathies are with the Democrats, Greenspan has treated Bush well. But that need not continue, and it would cause a firestorm if Bush tried to fire him. Still, appointing Rubin as Fed Chief would be like installing Judas as VP.
I did not know that C-SPAN made commentary or offered opinions or implied any favorites (well once I e-mailed my displeasure with one of the female moderators). I've watched them for at least 15 years, usually it's live camera or callers on Washington Journal, have I missed something? ...rto
C-SPAN chooses what segments of The Call-in shows to re-air.
When Clinton was president every appearance in front of a microphone was shown repeatedly. This does not occur with President Bush.
When C-SPAN does show an event of President Bush's, they FREQUENTLY post TBA on their schedule so that it is not really possible to program a VCR.
To me, all of these decisions are a way of showing an opinion, without stating an opinion.
Do you know of any other time that C-SPAN has had a five part "prime time series?" I thought they showed the House and the Senate until adjournment each day with fill-ins of other meetings and speeches. I have only been a viewer and listener of C-SPAN for the past 3-4 years, so I would appreciate it if you could point out for me other 'series' they have done, that I am just not aware of.
PS: I am always alert for biased news coverage and even found fault with FoxNews when they hired Geraldo and Greta and have suspicions of O'Reilly. My primary news sources are c-span, freerepublic.com, Rush, Brit Hume in that order with daily reading of the NYTimes.com (stay abreast of progressive reporting;^) and occassional scanning of the other news networks
When I go to their internet site, I see a conspicuous absence of programming which includes President Bush. If it was not for Rintense's thread, many of us would think our president was meeting no one and going nowhere.
Do you think the current coverage is equivalent to the camera time they gave Clinton?
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.