CNN explains the Pelosi controversy

April 6, 2007

I’m sorry to keep harping on the media’s coverage of Speaker Pelosi’s trip to Syria, but I’m at a loss to explain how ridiculous the reporting has been, particularly among television journalists. Atrios flagged a quote this morning from CNN that I assumed he misheard. Alas, I checked the transcript and it was exactly right.

“…Assad has been meeting with all kind of American congressmen over this past week, some of them Republicans. He met with five Republicans, Frank Wolf, Republican from Virginia knew full well that the administration didn’t want him going there and he said, ‘I don’t care what the administration says’ and he went on and held his meetings. But he’s one of 435, it’s just different. It’s perceptual politics and it’s perceptual diplomacy and if Pelosi didn’t realize that before, she does now.”

This is from CNN special correspondent Frank Sesno, explaining why Pelosi’s trip is controversial.

Now, I suppose Sesno deserves some credit for noting that House Republicans were also meeting with Assad. But if someone can explain what the rest of the quote means, I’d appreciate it. I’ve read his analysis a few times now, and can’t make heads or tails of it.

It seems Sesno was saying that Pelosi’s trip is different from Republicans’ trips because it’s different. And because people believe that it’s different, it is different.

This is why I don’t watch news on television.

no, it’s different because the republicans want everyone to think it’s different. that’s their reality – it’s called perceptual reality.

  • If you think CNN is bad, check out MSNBC. I usually don’t watch daytime news because I am at school teaching classes, but apparently this entire ridiculous tirade is spearheaded by Dick Cheney with some remarks he made on Rush Sleezeball’s show. Good god when will these people start reporting the news or start to do some research?

  • The phrase “television journalism” has no meaning, or it hasn’t had for a very long time. The only purpose of TeeVee “news” is to sell metamucil and viagra, just like the much wittier and better acted mid-day soaps.

  • Steve,

    The difference is clear. The Speaker of the House is much, much more prominent than any “one of 435” House members.

    I have no beef with Pelosi’s trip, and certainly not the headscarf bit.

    But Sesno’s point here is clear, and it has some merit. Disagree with him if you like, “No, no, no, whether it is the Speaker or one of 435 members, it still ….” But don’t pretend he’s just babbling nonsense.

  • “It’s perceptual politics and it’s perceptual diplomacy.”

    What the hell does this even mean? Here is where the American people are right now: Bush is an out of control arsehole, Cheney is a giant dick, this Administration makes Nixon’s goons look honest and the war sucks on ice. There’s your damn perception.

    Anything that isn’t the same old crap from the same old creeps in the same old White House can’t be bad. The more Dicky Bird blubbers about Pelosi’s “Bad Behaviour” (Bad Nancy, daddy spank) the more the 72 percenters will love her. He can keep the 28% from the shallow end of the gene pool.

    “And because he believes people believe that it’s different, it is different.”

    I doubt Sensless has asked what people think, but like any hack worth the title he has no trouble stating his opinions as commonly accepted facts.

  • It seems like its “different” because she’s a Democrat and that is not OK. I remember the righties crapping their pants when Jim McGovern went to the Middle East awhile back as well.

    Also, to the extent that its different because its “perceived” as different, who’s creating the perception? Well, my guess would be the cable news network who is promoting and hyping this story endlessly.

  • This is from CNN special correspondent Frank Sesno, explaining why Pelosi’s trip is controversial.

    …Using John Boehner’s words, more or less.

    That’s what must’ve happened: he was quoting Boehner, but the attribution got edited out. Oh, how embarrassing for Sesno, to see his news report turned into something that looks more like him stating his own opinion. They’ll never let him live that down at the journalist bar — y’know, the one from “Murphy Brown.”

  • CNN also just ran a report on all the ways the British prisoners’ treatment by Iran might violate the Geneva Conventions. Nowhere in this stunning report did they mention how the US government treats prisoners. I’m still in shock from their amazing capacity for cognitive dissonance.

  • I saw CNN’s Brit POW report. It’s true that CNN didn’t mention how the U. S. treats its prisoners, and they shouldn’t have. The story was a report about Britain and Iran, not about America. TV journalism is a contradiction in terms, mainly because opinion so often is reported as news. To CNN’s credit in this instance, it didn’t editorialize.

    As for Sesno, he has a history of expending excess words in order to say nothing. In this case, however, I think his mistake was not clarifying that he meant Pelosi is different because she’s the Speaker of the House. Whether his analysis is valid is another matter.

  • It’s different because Pelosi, with one dedicated trip, might actually change the dynamic and make something happen. Whereas RepubCo asswipes could spend the rest of their lives camped out in front of Assad’s house and not a thing would change.

    Change is bad. Therefore, Pelosi is bad. And scary beyond all comprehension. The world must be notified.

    Status quo is worshipped in ShrubCo’s Cult of Warlove. Therefore RepubCo’s hollow, castrato shills are irrelevant and not worth mentioning.

  • She’s different than the remaining 434 because she’s third in line of succession. Should we be able to get Cheney and Bush impeached (and I’m still hoping, though would prefer criminal prosecution), she’d be the first female President of USA. I bet even Hillary doesn’t like the idea, never mind the old white males in the repub wing.

    Congresscritters keep saying impeachement is off the table but, with so much dirt coming into the light daily, there may be a point where it will not only be a possible but an inevitable outcome.

  • There is no difference whatsoever between Pelosi and any other member of the House on this issue, simply BECAUSE the Riech-wingers played the Logan Act card. Bush cannot come in and grant an after-the-fact “bye” to GOP congressmen who have ben plying the Damascus route for some time now, and then declare that the Speaker did wrong. And I’d sure love to hear from all the Reich “trolls” out there as to how “Speaker Noot” was so-ooo able to go to places when it was obvious that the move was nothing more than a “machismo” effort to undermine the Clinton Presidency—but “Speaker Female Democrat” somehow isn’t.

    Again, that’s what this is about—and it’s ALL that this is about—the Bu$hCo boys don’t like their deer leader getting waxed by a girl….

  • For once I actually agree with the MSM and CNN and their ilk:

    –> Nancy Pelosi, two months after she took office, “the most controversial House Speaker yet.”

  • to add to my previous comment (glitch when hitting the “POST” button)

    I totally agree because she’s the first one who is NOT kissing the Bush administration’s butt. She’s actually doing her job which could not be said of the previous Republican House Speaker(s)

    • Comments are closed.