Thursday, June 23, 2005

Now Franken is lying about Howard Kurtz

This is really an incredible story.

Back on June 8 and again on the 21, Franken attacked as "scandalous," Bill O'Reilly as having taken an interview of Joe Biden by "stephy" Stepahnopoulos on the issue of prison abuse at Gitmo and whether the prison should be shut down, and edited out key words from the interview. Among the points that O'Reilly "edited" out was Biden's calling for a commission to investigate the accusations. But O'Reilly himself has called for a commission and it looks like, according to Franken, that O'Reilly claimed Biden's idea as his own.

Further, Franken claimed that when he tried to peddle this story to Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post and CNN's 'Reliable Sources,' Kurtz replied, "well, they do that all the time."

Here is the truth:

1.While O'Reilly did edit some of Biden's interview, the context was in no way altered - Biden did support the closing down of Gitmo.

2.Yes, Biden called for a commission - but he wanted a commission that would report back that the allegations of abuse were true and that Gitmo should be closed down. O'Reilly, on the other hand, called on the president to appoint a commission in the belief that they would exxonerate the troops and put all the rumors to rest.

3. In an email exchange with Howard Kurtz, he denied saying anything resembling what Franken attributed to him. What Kurtz claimed he said was, "these charges are made against Fox (and others) all the time.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Letter to Penguin Publishing

June 21, 2005

Susan Peterson Kennedy
Penguin Group
375 Hudson Street
New York, New York 10014

Dear Ms. Peterson Kennedy,

I am writing in response to a recent letter David Brock of Media Matters wrote you complaining about the “editorial standards” and “fact - checking” of one of your imprints, Sentinel, for the publishing of Ed Klein’s new book on Hillary Clinton.

Brock, in his letter to you, which he publicized on his website, accuses Penguin of “gross negligence at best.”

For the record, I have not read Klein’s book, but I have read Al Franken’s book, Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them, published by another one of Penguins imprints, Dutton.

And while Brock and Franken claim that “painstaking research” and “detailed documentation” went into Franken’s book, I have documented numerous lies and distortions, equally as reprehensible as alleged by Brock on Klein’s book, which will be made public in my upcoming book, Pants on Fire- How Al Franken Lies, Smears, and Deceives (WND).

Unfortunately, Brock has a history of trying to silence those he does not agree with. Some may call this sad attempt, censorship.

Here are just a few examples:

September 30, 2004 Brock sent a letter to MSNBC demanding that they cancel Frank Luntz’s (who is a Republican) focus group following the Presidential debates.

October 26, 2004 Brock demanded that NBC not feature Rush Limbaugh on election night.

August 20, 2004 Brock sent a letter to bookstores demanding that they remove, Unfit for Command, from their shelves.

Lest you think that I am just a “right winger” out to discredit David Brock, I’d like to refer you to a column written by Timothy Noah of ‘Slate’, a liberal on-line magazine, under a column called Chatterbox.
The article is titled, ‘David Brock, Liar: A lifelong habit proves hard to break.’ Dated March 27, 2002.

Here are some excerpts from the column where Noah is reviewing Brocks book, ‘Blinded by the Right’:

“Whiny, histrionic, and so factually unreliable that Chatterbox practically gave himself a migraine trying to figure out which parts of Brock’s lurid story were true, and which parts were false.”….But Blinded by the Right offers plenty of evidence that for Brock, lying has been a lifelong habit.” “…How can we trust a writer who won’t even summarize his own book truthfully?” (You can read the entire column at:

I thank you for taking the time to read my letter.

Alan Skorski

Thursday, June 09, 2005

Franken don't know Ruth

I haven't posted for a little over a week now as I put the finishing touches on my upcoming expose on Al Franken, Pants on Fire.

This is going back to June 1, with another episode of "Rush Limbaugh lies."

But I caught him.

Here's the context of the story:

Rush brought up that Ruth Bader Ginsburg, RBG, who is much more extreme than any of Bush's nominees, was treated much better than Brown, Owens, Pryor, et al. He then goes onto cite an example of her extremism .

But Franken says it's a lie - she never said it.

So here is the segment and exchange with "resident ditto-head" (who visits with Al 1-3 times a week)Mark Luther.

On June 1, 2005, during the now often predictable “resident ditto-head” segment, Franken played the following audio clip of Rush:

“You know, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is more extreme than any of these nominees that Bush has brought up. I went through this list of things she actually believes in, that came out in her testimony, such as getting rid of Mother’s Day and Father’s Day and replacing it with Parent’s Day…”

Franken to Luther: “…she never actually said anything about Mother’s Day and Father’s Day for Parents Day…ANYWHERE.”

Luther (developing a backbone): So you think he is just fabricating this completely?

Franken: I think it’s an urban myth from conservatives. We got this from Thomas E. Mann, a Brookings Institute Senior Fellow on Government Studies. He told us... I now have it on the highest and closest authority that Ruth Bader Ginsburg has NEVER , in any setting, proposed doing anything with Mother’s Day…

So I did a google search to see for myself, rather than rely on “Franken’s painstaking research”, and put in the words, “urban conservative myth” and “Ruth Bader Ginsburg” and “Franken smears Limbaugh.” Wouldn’t you know it, I got thousands of hits. So I tried to narrow my requests to, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg” and “Franken’s crappy research.”
Again, way too many hits. So I gave it one last try and just inserted, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg” and something about dropping Mother’s Day and Father’s Day for Parents Day.

Well There it was.
- The quote from Ruth Bader Ginsburg (that Franken said didn’t exist)
- The setting from whence the good judge proposed dropping the aforementioned celebration for the singular Parents’ Day (that Franken said didn’t exist)
- The smear made against Rush exposed (that Franken says doesn’t exist)

The so-called “urban conservative myth” came from a column on NRO, Bench Warmers, Putting Judicial Nominees in Perspective, Part III, written by Edward Whelan, (5/20/2005).
In the article, Whelan cites the “Report of Columbia Law School Equal Rights Advocacy Project: The Legal Status of Women under Federal Law” co-authored by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Brenda Feigen Fasteau in September 1974, as the non-existent source of Ginsburg’s “mainstream” philosophy.