What is it with that guy? He just ran the piece about the new Bush "wolves" ad attacking Kerry, and says the following, and I paraphrase:
While Kerry did propose intelligence cuts in the 90s, senior republicans in congress did too, but kerry's cuts were larger and across the board.Then he puts the exact phrase "Cuts were larger and across the board" in BIG bold letters on the screen next to Kerry's face.
Well, call me crazy, but didn't Porter Goss, the new CIA chief for Bush, propose CIA cuts at the same time that were, oh, 5 or 6 times larger than Kerry's? Why, yes, I'm right. From the Washington Post:
"The Bush reelection campaign has been blasting Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry as deeply irresponsible for proposing intelligence cuts at the same time. A Bush campaign ad released on Aug. 13 carried a headline: 'John Kerry...proposed slashing Intelligence Budget 6 Billion Dollars.' But the cuts Goss supported are larger than those proposed by Kerry and specifically targeted the 'human intelligence' that has recently been found lacking. The recent report by the commission probing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks called for more spending on human intelligence." (Washington Post, 8/24/04)Sure, Moran is apparently "correct" that Kerry's cuts were larger and across the board, but Bush's own CIA director wanted even LARGER cuts, and that's not relevant to this story? If I know this fact by simply reading the Wash Post, why doesn't Terry Moran or his people?
I'm sorry, I know people can make mistakes, but that was a nasty segment - blowing up the words next to Kerry's face, when in fact, Kerry has proposed less than Bush's own CIA director. Totally irresponsible one week before an election. And doing it in the context of reporting on the wolf ad basically says Bush is right. Way to go, ABC.
