December 4, 2002
BuzzFlash Takes a Walk Down Memory Lane: The Elliot Abrams BuzzFlash/Zogby
Polling Question that Resulted in the Wall Street Journal Calling BuzzFlash.com
"The Shrillest and the Most Dimwitted Political Site on the Web."
BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
Before BuzzFlash grew into a global empire rivaling Rupert Murdoch's (okay, maybe we're a little smaller), we didn't archive our commentaries and interviews. That explains why we are posting the following e-mail alert about our celebrated July, 2001, BuzzFlash/Zogby poll question about whether or not Elliot Abrams should be given a position in the White House (which he was) by the Bush Cartel.
We are sending the e-mail, because we are still looking through disks for the actual poll results and accompanying BuzzFlash commentary. (Due to the financial support of our readers -- and a fantastic managing editor who started in October of 2001 as a result of your generosity -- we now archive all our original material on the website.)
Why is the Elliot Abrams BuzzFlash/Zogby poll question relevant on December 4? Because Abrams just got a White House Promotion! (See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1842-2002Dec3.html)
The poll was accurate +/- 3 % points for all Americans.
The question seemed fair to us. It was something like this: "President Bush appointed Elliot Abrams, a man who pleaded guilty to the crime of lying to Congress, to a top White House position in charge of international human rights. Do you believe that someone convicted of deceiving Congress should be appointed to a top-level White House position?"
The results of the BuzzFlash question actually created quite a dust-up. The Wall Street Journal editorial page denounced BuzzFlash as "the shrillest and most dimwitted political site on the web." (This is the slogan we proudly print on the back of our T-shirts. They also called us a "chuckle-headed left wing site.") They claimed he hadn't actually lied to Congress, although Abrams plea-bargained to the charges.
Anyway (sorry that this is getting so long, but we're having fun recounting our "salad days"), Zogby, who does accurate polling but is known to be favored by Republican clients, wimped out and told the Wall Street Journal that he was out of the country when the polling question was reviewed -- and that he would not have allowed it to be used. Needless to say, we didn't continue our relationship with Zogby.
But it was sure a hoot! You know you're on the path to truth and justice when the Wall Street Journal takes time to go medieval on you.
So, after that long introduction, here's the e-mail alert about the original Elliot Abram's polling question, which we are sure will be anticlimactic by now.
When we have some extra time, we will descend into our technology cellar, dust off the disks and find the actual polling results.
Until then, enjoy.
And thanks again for helping move BuzzFlash into the 21st Century as far as technology. We've come a long way due to your support.
ONLY 16 % OF AMERICANS BELIEVE A MAN WHO LIED TO CONGRESS SHOULD SERVE IN THE WHITE HOUSE
Yes, that's right! According to an Exclusive BuzzFlash.com/Zogby poll finding, ONLY 16 % OF AMERICANS BELIEVE A MAN WHO LIED TO CONGRESS SHOULD SERVE IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
Elliot Abrams, the man journalist Eric Alterman says has "blood on his hands," the man who pleaded guilty to lying to Congress....Well, these are apparently the types of qualifications that George W. Bush is looking for. That's why, in an Orwellian move, Bush appointed Abrams to head the White House office overseeing "International Human Rights."
The trouble for Bush, however, is that an exclusive BuzzFlash poll reveals that very few Americans support putting someone who lied to Congress in the White House. And most of the few people who agree with him are Republicans, who seem to condone lying when you are a member of the Grand Hypocrisy Party, but condemn the first whiff of even the most minor prevarication if you're a Democrat.
There are many implications to the details of the polling results, but for some initial thoughts, BuzzFlash once again turns to one of its loyal readers, Carolyn Kay:
"Now I ask you, haven't you heard conservatives claiming to have integrity, and saying that liberals do not? Yet an amazing 37.2% of people who identify themselves as conservative either believe that an admitted liar should be given a top White House post or are not sure about the issue. Even more amazing is the fact that 48.6% of people who call themselves very conservative agree with them. Did we not spend $60 million dollars on an investigation that attempted to throw a president out of office for lying?
"Isn't a proscription against lying one of the Ten Commandments? Isn't it conservatives who want to post a copy of the Ten Commandments in every school? What good would that do when more than a third of them, even approaching half of the most conservative ones, seem to believe that it's all right to lie about substantive issues, if you're a conservative liar, but not all right to lie about private personal matters, if you're not a conservative liar. Isn't that moral relativism? That bugaboo that conservatives keep throwing at us?
"Hypocrisy just isn't a strong enough word any more."
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com
Thanks Carolyn. Lying and hypocrisy, apparently, are desirable resume qualities in a Bush White House.
(End
of July, 2001, alert.)
BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
* * *
