Wednesday, April 29, 2009

ABC News Fiercely Defends Notoriously 'Desperate' Reporter

By John Cook (Excerpt)
Apr 28 2009

ABC News' Brian Ross styles himself a gumshoe of the old-school, and his network calls him "one of the most honored and respected journalists in the country." So why is he wrong so often?

Ross is the guy who breathlessly announced that he had the phone records of Deborah Jeane Palfrey—a.k.a. the Washington Madam—only to come up with the names of two lousy low-level clients in a much-hyped sweeps-month 20/20 investigation that went nowhere. For years he relied on Alexis Debat—an ABC News consultant who was revealed in 2007 to have concocted fake interviews with American politicians for publication in a French journal—for stories ranging from secret U.S. operations in Iran to Americans joining the Taliban. (ABC News says those stories were still true.) He's the guy who reported inaccurately in 2001, in the aftermath of the anthrax attacks, that the anthrax letters contained a "potent additive...known to have been used by only one country in producing biochemical weapons - Iraq." And he's the guy who, just last week, falsely accused Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of calling Barack Obama an "indentured servant" to the coal industry by taking a quote from his interview with Kennedy dramatically out of context.

Now Ross has drawn the ire of the New York Times for his 2007 exclusive report featuring former CIA agent John Kiriakou, who came forward on the record to confirm that the CIA had waterboarded suspected terrorist Abu Zubaydah. Kiriakou pointedly used the word "torture" to describe the process but insisted that it was exceedingly limited, and that it worked—Zubaydah started cooperating after one 30-second session, Kiriakou told Ross.

As the New York Times' Brian Stelter and Scott Shane point out, Kiriakou was either lying or didn't know what he was talking about. According to the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel memos released this month, Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times.

Ross' story, the Times reports, "heightened the public perception of waterboarding as an effective interrogation technique" and "ricocheted around the media," leading Rush Limbaugh to proclaim: "It works, is the bottom line. Thirty to 35 seconds, and it works." What didn't ricochet around the media was the fact that the torture occurred in Thailand, and Kiriakou was sitting at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. ...


When Goering was a Pin-Up: The German Women's Magazines that Mixed Fashion with Fascism

"With knitting patterns, recipes and fashion, it seems to offer a diverting read for housewives and mothers. ... "

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Fox News Greets Alleged Torture with Antics

Summary: Many on Fox News have greeted the release of Justice Department memos authorizing the CIA's use of harsh interrogation techniques with antics that mock the notion that these practices constitute torture.

Media Matters/Apr 23, 2009

Many on Fox News have greeted the release of several previously classified Department of Justice memos authorizing the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques with antics that mock the notion that these practices constitute torture. Glenn Beck faked tears to ridicule the notion of waterboarding as torture; host Bill O'Reilly told columnist Ellis Henican that "I would have dunked that guy in the water a thousand times to save your life"; and host Sean Hannity slammed a football down on the desk in front of him while saying, "[I]magine this is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's head. Dunk it in water so we can save American lives."

As Media Matters for America has previously noted, Allen S. Keller, M.D., director of the Bellevue Hospital Center/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture, submitted written testimony to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that stated that waterboarding can cause "[l]ong term effects includ[ing] panic attacks, depression and PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder]," and said it poses a "real risk of death."

On the April 22 edition of his Fox News program, Glenn Beck gave mock sobs after noting that "[c]ritics of the Bush-approved [interrogation] methods have called them torture." Later in the program, Beck played a clip from the current season of 24, in which Jack Bauer defends his use of torture in a congressional hearing, to support his argument that "the people who actually fight the wars need to be left alone to do their job and supported to do their job, and then stand by what they've done, no matter what the consequences are." As Media Matters has noted, Beck, as well as Fox & Friends hosts Kilmeade and Steve Doocy, have previously cited the same 24 scene to defend torture.

While discussing potential torture prosecutions on the April 22 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly told Fox News contributor and Newsday columnist Ellis Henican: "I would have dunked that guy in the water a thousand times to save your life." He later repeated: "To save your life, I would have dunked the guy in the water." After Henican asked O'Reilly, "You're coming out for torture now?" O'Reilly responded: "All right, Ellis, calm down."

On the April 22 edition of Hannity, during a discussion of torture with guest Charles Grodin, Hannity said: "I don't believe that waterboarding is torture."

Grodin subsequently asked Hannity: "[W]ould you consent to be waterboarded?" Hannity replied: "Yes." When Grodin asked the question again, Hannity repeatedly reaffirmed that he would do so, telling Grodin: "I'll do it for charity. I'll let you do it. I'll do it for the troops' families." As Media Matters has noted, in 2006, Fox News correspondent Steve Harrigan was waterboarded on-air, and concluded that the technique was "a pretty efficient mechanism to get someone to talk and then still have them alive and healthy within minutes."

During the "Great American Panel" discussion on the April 22 edition of Hannity, Hannity held up a football and then slammed it down on the desk in front of him, saying: "You know what? I'm -- this is -- imagine this is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's head. Dunk it in water so we can save American lives. You bet."

On the April 20 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said of reports that Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times: "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, I understand, was waterboarded 183 times. Did anyone care about that? Does anyone in America walk around going, 'I'm really upset that the mastermind of 9-11 was waterboarded 183 times?' " Kilmeade added: "That makes me feel better." After co-host Gretchen Carlson, playing "devil's advocate," stated that some might consider the treatment of Mohammed to be torture, Kilmeade said: "It's unbelievable that people care more about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, his health, than they would about future attacks that are being hatched on our country."

From the April 22 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: And the national intelligence director, Dennis Blair, says tough interrogation tactics yielded, quote, "high-value information." Critics of the Bush-approved methods have called them torture. And President Obama says that those tactics won't be used on his watch.

But here is the one thing that people on both sides of the torture debate don't seem to understand. This really isn't about uncooperative suspects. This is about uncooperative politicians. Let's look at the politicians for a while.

From the April 22 edition of Fox News' Hannity:

HANNITY: All right. Let me ask you -- I'm never going to --

GRODIN: Well, you're for torture, right?

HANNITY: I am for enhanced interrogation. I don't believe that waterboarding is torture.

GRODIN: You're not -- but you don't believe it's torture. Have you ever been waterboarded?

HANNITY: No, but Ollie North has, and I talked to him about it.

GRODIN: And how -- would you consent to be waterboarded --


GRODIN: -- so we could get the truth out of you?

HANNITY: Yeah. Sure.

GRODIN: We can waterboard you?


GRODIN: Are you busy on Sunday?

HANNITY: I'll do it for charity. I'll let you do it.

GRODIN: I wouldn't to do it.

HANNITY: I'll do it for the troops' families.

GRODIN: I wouldn't do it. I'll hand you a towel when you come out of the shower.

HANNITY: When I come out of the shower.

How is Liz Cheney an Expert on Interrogations?

" ... [Liz] defending torture reminds me of a few other times where the Bush administration trotted out husbands, wives and siblings to defend or support tenuous situations, and provide a familial ladder to help them escape from deep political holes ... "

Posted by Adam Blickstein

Dick's daughter Liz been all over MSNBC and the media after her interview with Norah O'Donnell where she vigorously defends her daddy's torture regime, but I can't find any instance in the past where she's been vocal on the issue. She was the Bush administration's Middle East Democracy expert at the State Department (remember when democracy was on the march there but then pretty much stopped in its tracks?), but after a thorough search, I can't find any interview previous to this one, either in print or TV, where she provided public commentary on interrogation methodology, the success or failures of various detainee policies, nor the efficacy of "enhanced interrogation." The only way I can see that she qualifies as an authoritative voice on this issue is that she shares the same name and blood as the torture policy's architect. But her defending torture reminds me of a few other times where the Bush administration trotted out husbands, wives and siblings to defend or support tenuous situations, and provide a familial ladder to help them escape from deep political holes. ...


Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Catholic League Claims Ron Howard is Lying in 'Angels & Demons'

Note: The subject of Ron Howard's film is the "Illuminati," a clutch of "utopian" thinkers, intellectual forbears of socialism, based in late 18th century Bavaria and forced out of existence by the 19th, often scapegoated in contemporary right-wing (whacked) conspiracy theories. It's a schizophrenic concept: this alleged communist secret society is composed, Birchers claim, of (despised) Satanists and (cherished) Founding Fathers. Brrrr. Supposedly, the "Illuminati" are still with us - a secret conspiratorial alliance of Jews, Masons and Communists that only exists in the right-wing imagination, popularized by the Birch Society, a fascist front secretly financed in the '50s by Nazi survivors of WW II. It is a Hitlerian propaganda concept, designed to advance the aims of the far-right, and bears no relation to reality. Howard muddles history by confusing "Illuminati" with Freemasonry - the equivalent of mistaking the Knights of Malta with the Vatican, to draw a comparison - and the League has taken advantage of this confusion by issuing a blanket denial. Galileo (1564-1642), a Freemason, was indeed hounded by the church for supporting Copernican cosmology, but Howard has him living in the wrong century.

- AC

Ron Howard Lies About 'Angels & Demons'

Contact: Susan A. Fani, Director of Communications, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, 212-371-3191,

MEDIA ADVISORY, April 21 /Standard Newswire/ -- Ron Howard, director of "Angels & Demons," the movie version of Dan Brown's book by that name, attacked Catholic League president Bill Donohue yesterday on the Huffington Post.

Referring to a booklet on the movie that Donohue authored, "Angels & Demons: More Demonic than Angelic," (click here) Howard wrote: "Mr. Donohue's booklet accuses us of lying when our movie trailer says the Catholic Church ordered a brutal massacre to silence the Illuminati centuries ago. It would be a lie if we had ever suggested our movie is anything other than a work of fiction...." Howard also said that "most in the hierarchy of the Church" will enjoy his film; he denies being anti-Catholic.

Donohue responded today:

"Dan Brown says in his book that the Illuminati are 'factual' and that they were 'hunted ruthlessly by the Catholic Church.' In the film's trailer, Tom Hanks, who plays the protagonist Robert Langdon, says 'The Catholic Church ordered a brutal massacre to silence them forever.' Howard concurs: 'The Illuminati were formed in the 1600s. They were artists and scientists like Galileo and Bernini, whose progressive ideas threatened the Vatican.'

"All of this is a lie. The Illuminati were founded in 1776 and were dissolved in 1787. It is obvious that Galileo and Bernini could not possibly have been members: Galileo died in 1647 and Bernini passed away in 1680. More important, the Catholic Church never hunted, much less killed, a single member of the Illuminati. But this hasn't stopped Brown from asserting that 'It is a historical fact that the Illuminati vowed vengeance against the Vatican in the 1600s.'

"Howard must be delusional if he thinks Vatican officials are going to like his propaganda -- they denied him the right to film on their grounds. Moreover, we know from a Canadian priest who hung out with Howard's crew last summer in Rome (dressed in civilian clothes) just how much they hate Catholicism. It's time to stop the lies and come clean."

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Tom Joyner, Steve Harvey, Tavis Smiley, and the Impoverishment of Black Media

Excerpt by Bruce A. Dixon
Black Agenda Report

“The cancellation provoked outrage among fans because the Tom Joyner Morning Show is about as good as commercial black radio is allowed to get nowadays.”

'The bottom line,” radio fly-jock Tom Joyner told fans in his blog, “is that black radio will never be what it once was, and there's absolutely nothing we can do about it.” Joyner tried to put the yanking of his show by Clear Channel into perspective for fans, who deluged his blog and email with expressions of support, and even talk of consumer boycotts. Joyner discouraged boycott chatter, and like Steve Harvey, who seems likely to replace him on many Clear Channel outlets, declared it was all “just business.”

The cancellation provoked outrage among fans because the Tom Joyner Morning Show is about as good as commercial black radio is allowed to get nowadays. Despite the show's limited playlist of corporate-approved music and periodic descents into minstrelsy, Joyner regularly set aside a small amount of time for commentary, issues and appeals addressed to African Americans as a community. It was never much time, and the issues, the commentary were relatively safe stuff on the whole. But to the news-starved audience of black commercial radio, Tom Joyner, like his colleague Tavis Smiley, stand out like rare gulps of fresh air.

But sustaining the life of a community takes more than an occasional breath. Community and democracy demand a steady diet of news to fuel civic engagement and public conversation in the public interest.

As BAR's Glen Ford pointed out all of six years ago in 'Who Killed Black Radio News,” the owners of commercial black media have for a generation enforced a no-news policy, justifying it with the unsupportable claim that all black people want is to be entertained." The fact is that news is less profitable than 100% entertainment. PR firms and the celebrity industries provide their own “news” releases complete with commercial tie-ins, and already segmented to the age and income divided groups that marketers love. Black radio owners decided not to do news because corporate media has consciously decided not to recognize African Americans as a people or a polity with our own set of collective experience and political will. In a media regime that lives and dies by advertising alone, black commercial radio will only recognize black communities as marketing contraptions, as audience segments whose ears and eyeballs it can deliver to sponsors.

The owners and managers of commercial black radio and TV are not the least concerned about our past or future, our housing or health care crises, the black imprisonment rate or the digital divide or the education of our young or the dignified security of our elderly. To them we are just a market, passive consumers to be sliced and diced according to marketing industry guidelines. A hip hop station, an oldies station, an easy listening urban station, a gospel station, all under the same ownership with no news on any of them, forever and ever, amen. If this is what Joyner meant, and we think it was, when he described the current state of black commercial radio, he was right. Except the “forever' part. Except when he told fans '...there's absolutely nothing we can do about it.”

Commercial black radio and TV have not always been hostile to and incompatible with journalism. There was a brief period, back in the early and mid 1970s when journalism flourished on commercial black radio. Local teams of African American journalists competed with each other to report and package non-entertainment news directed at black communities. News gathering and reporting operations on commercial black radio played a key role in the black conversation, enabling African American communities to define themselves as more than passive masses of consumers and voters. They heyday of black broadcast journalism didn't last long. News was never as profitable as entertainment, and as limits on how many stations one owner could have were removed, owners borrowed heavily to get more stations, and cut costs to reward themselves and repay the loans. News was the first casualty, reported Glen Ford six years ago.

There need not have been a contradiction between Black ownership and community access, including the maintenance of quality news operations. In a betrayal that, we believe, has been a major factor in the relentless decline of Black political power, many Black radio owners have adopted business plans identical to their white corporate peers.

Such is certainly the case with Radio One. "The company's voraciousness mirrored the consolidation throughout the radio industry after rules limiting the number of stations one company could own nationally were lifted in 1996," wrote the Washington Post, in a February 5, 2003 showcase article. Radio One boasts a 60-person research department that "randomly calls thousands of people and conducts 20-minute surveys of those who tune in to its radio stations." Do the people want news? The subject isn't broached by either Post reporter Krissah Williams or her main interlocutor, Radio One Chief Operating Officer Mary Catherine Sneed. Instead, the conversation is all about the sales value of entertainment programming. "If you're not [at parties, clubs and grass-roots events], you'll never be a big personality in the community," Sneed said. "Those are the things that separate stations from one another."


Thursday, April 16, 2009

Fox News-Driven "Tea Parties" Fail to Ignite Popular Uprising Among U.S. Conservatives

" ... In yet another tea-bag day controversy, Fox anchor Neil Cavuto was captured on an open mic discussing the crowd numbers with an on-location producer, estimating the turnout at 5,000 people, but minutes later Cavuto told viewers that 'They were expecting 5,000 here, it's got to be easily double, if not triple that.' ... "

APRIL 15, 2009

A family holds signs at a "tea party" protest on the grounds of the Colorado tate capitol in Denver April 15, 2009. Protests were held in many U.S. cities loosely inspired by the 1773 Boston Tea Party rebellion against British colonial taxes, which helped spark the American revolution. The crowds demonstrated against taxes, government bailouts and U.S. President Barack Obama's budget proposal.

A reportedly corporate-financed grassroots" anti-tax movement, paid for, planned and promoted by right wing think tanks, corporate lobbyists and Fox News Channel, has failed to bring about the "popular uprising" against the Obama administration its creators had hoped for.

The day of "tea parties" were pushed by Republican operatives and partisan advocacy groups such as FreedomWorks, a conservative advocacy group helmed by former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey. Organizers sought to encourage protest over the Obama government's tax and stimulus policies by asking people to wave tea bags, but the national event brought about only a few hundred "tea-baggers" in most parts of the U.S., despite relentless promotion by Fox News TV hosts.

Participants had hoped to rally hundreds of thousands of people to begin a grassroots movement that would force Obama to change government policy. But the turn-out was far from what was hoped for, with most rallies looking decidedly on the small side, especially compared to the 2006 immigrants rights rallies or the 2004 pro-choice march on Washington, both of which attracted millions.

4,000 people are reported to have shown up in Cincinnati, Ohio, while Chicago and Sacramento drew an estimated 5,000 protesters each and Des Moines, Iowa pulled 3,000. 100 people reportedly turned out in Salt Lake City, Utah, a traditionally strong Republican town. Farmingville, New York, drew 50 hardy souls.

Those that did show up to the right wing event Wednesday didn't hold back from expressing their thoughts on government. Protest signs seen in the Washington D.C. tea-bag protest featured slogans such as "Commander in Thief," "Party like it's 1773" and "Hang 'em high," the latter also featuring a list of Democrats the sign holder wants taken to the gallows. Another stated, "The American taxpayers are the Jews for Obama's ovens" [link].

According to reports, organizers of the D.C. event were told by National Park Service officials that the "million tea bags" they had hauled in on the back of a pickup would have to be taken away, rather than be dumped as planned. They reportedly complied with the request after realizing they didn't have the correct protest permit.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a local think tank, offered to provide its 12th floor board room as an alternate venue to dump the tea bags.

A 68-year-old woman at the Sunbury Pennsylvania protest had to be rescued by police from the Susquehanna River when she inadvertently fell in while trying to dump tea bags in it.

White House press spokesman Robert Gibbs said of the protests, "I don't know if the President is aware of the events. I think the President will use tomorrow as a day to have an event here at the White House to signal the important steps in the economic recovery and reinvestment plan that cut taxes for 95 percent of working families in America, just as the President proposed doing; cuts in taxes and tax credits for the creation of clean energy jobs."

Rising popularity in the polls for President Barack Obama, a strengthening economy, and the unfortunate choice of name for the movement ("tea-bagging" is slang for a sexual act) are considered the prime reasons for the failure of the event, but recent exposure of the groups behind the protests also drove some away from taking part.

In the days leading up to the supposedly grassroots event, the New York Times' Paul Krugman noted, "a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey, the former House majority leader, and supported by the usual group of right-wing billionaires. And the parties are, of course, being promoted heavily by Fox News."

The involvement of a news channel in promoting a partisan event has caused many to give the political tilt of Fox News a second look.

In the lead-up to the event, Fox News featured 9 segments and 40 promos over just two days, according to the watchdog website Media Matters. Over a one week period, 10 in-show promos were given by Fox presenter Sean Hannity, while Neil Cavuto and Glen Beck delivered 5 each. Cavuto did seven news segments on the event. All Fox News shows featured commercials advertising the protests during that time, and they were regularly described as "FNC [Fox News Channel] Tax Day Tea Parties" by on-air personalities.

In addition, Fox News contributors were listed as "Tea Party Sponsor[s]" on the website promoting the event, while appearances by Fox personalities were used to promote individual rallies.

Fox News anchor Cody Willard, reporting from one of the protests, even went so far as to say on the air, "Guys, when are we going to wake up and start fighting the fascism that seems to be permeating this country?"

In yet another tea-bag day controversy, Fox anchor Neil Cavuto was captured on an open mic discussing the crowd numbers with an on-location producer, estimating the turnout at 5,000 people, but minutes later Cavuto told viewers that "They were expecting 5,000 here, it's got to be easily double, if not triple that."

Pasteurized Process News Food

by Richard Volaar
April 15, 2009

Good ideas are like popcorn on the web. Bob Alexander at came up with one to help get George W. Bush indicted for murder.

Jesse Richards at has a new video posted where he proposes a potential solution to our current media credibility crisis and offers his services, for a small fee, to appear with any mainstream talking head and demonstrate the outright lies and deceptions pushed into the heads of a naive and/or uneducated public.

Jesse has a background working for the Associated Press and states that there are 42 KNOWN Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives working in the media RIGHT NOW. ...

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

"I Made A Fool Of Myself Over John Foster Dulles"

"I Made A Fool Of Myself Over John Foster Dulles" - Song performed by a very young Carol Burnett on an installment of THE JACK PAAR SHOW in August of 1957 that later became a popular novelty record. The song parodied the teenage novelty records that glorified rock and roll singers. This song told of her infatuation with a politician-namely the Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles. The lyrics related the tale of how she got herself thrown into prison-classified as a "threat to the national security: Top Secret, First Class, 4.0, Double A!" At the song's conclusion she stated "I'm not un-American, and I'm not a spy, but how can I convince the FBI....that I'm simply on fire with desire for John Foster Dulles." John Foster Dulles, the object of her affection, actually missed the parody performance but he got to see a repeat of it a few days later. When a reporter asked Mr. Dulles what was going on between him and the enthusiastic young singer, he coyly remarked, "I make it a point never to discuss matters of the heart in public." The song (words and music by Ken Welch) was originally performed at the Blue Angel Nightclub in New York City during July of 1957.

Friday, April 3, 2009

CIA-CNN talk show host Tom Braden dies at 92

By Tom Watkins

(CNN) -- Tom Braden, the creator and co-host of CNN's "Crossfire," which pioneered the talk-show format that pitted a conservative against a liberal, died Friday at age 92.

Tom Braden died Friday at age 92 of natural causes at his home in Denver, Colorado.

Daughter Susan Braden said he died of natural causes at his home in Denver, Colorado.

In 1982, Braden took "Crossfire" to CNN from a local station in Washington and served as the program's host "from the left" until 1989.

"Many people believe that Tom created the genre of political talk shows and debate programs that has now been copied and copied and copied," said Sam Feist, CNN's political director and senior executive producer of political programming. "He was a giant of a man and one of the most decent human beings you'd ever want to meet. CNN was a better place because Tom Braden worked here."

Born in Greene, Iowa, Braden graduated from Dartmouth in spring 1940, when the Germans overran France. He volunteered to join the British army, said his good friend and conservative sparring partner, Pat Buchanan.

After fighting in the African desert, Braden joined the U.S. Office of Strategic Services when the United States joined the fight, then joined the CIA, Buchanan said.

Braden tried his hand at politics, running for lieutenant governor of California in 1966, when he lost in a Democratic primary.

He and Bobby Kennedy "were real buddies," Buchanan said.

Braden decided to become a journalist at the suggestion of the poet Robert Frost, Susan Braden said.

In 1975, he wrote the best-selling book, "Eight is Enough," about his eight children, which was made into a television sitcom that starred a crusty political columnist named Tom Bradford.

In 1977, he was co-hosting a Washington radio show called "Confrontation," a format that caught on quickly, Buchanan said.

"We took over afternoon drive," the former GOP presidential candidate said. "Braden and I would interrogate people, and we'd go at it 'til all hours."

Their show caught the attention of a local television station and then caught the attention of CNN's first president, Reese Schonfeld, who hired them to appear late at night on the fledgling cable channel, Buchanan said.

"We'd go out and have dinner and a few drinks and come back at 10 or 10:30 and start preparing for the 11:30 show," Buchanan said. "We'd have to yell to people to shut up in the newsroom."

Braden played the establishment liberal -- a Rockefeller, Kennedy man, and Buchanan played the Goldwater, Nixon man.

"He was a cantankerous character," Buchanan said. "He really didn't like conservatives, especially the new breed. It made for great chemistry and opposition."

But the dislike didn't get personal. "He would laugh at something that was at his expense if it was a good line. That's what you need in the show. An appreciation if the other guy scores a good point."

Once, they both found themselves interviewing a man representing the Ku Klux Klan. "He had on his hat and everything and he was sitting there with his arms folded," said Buchanan, who introduced the guest to the audience.

"So Tom Braden starts off and says, 'What the hell are you doing in this getup?'

"The guy said, 'Your producer told me to wear it.' It was ratings month. It was like that in the early days. It was wild, crazy stuff. But the ratings were tremendous."

So good that, after six months, the duo's show was moved up to 7:30 p.m., a half-hour after they finished their three-hour radio show, he said.

"We'd get in our cars, race to CNN, put powder on our faces, sit in the chair and start going after somebody," he said.

Braden stuck to his guns, Buchanan said, citing an interview with Cal Thomas, the columnist. "Cal accused him of writing, I think, for a pornographic magazine, and Braden hadn't written for them, but had been interviewed by them.

"Braden says, 'You're going to apologize to me or I'm walking off the show.' And Cal didn't apologize, and Braden walked off his own show. It was a very funny moment.

"I immediately said, 'We're going to have to go to break here.' "

After the break, Braden returned. "Fortunately, it was taped," Buchanan said.

"It was the most important part of his life," Susan Braden said of her father's years at CNN. "It was his life, it was what he did. He was a part of something, the beginning of something."

She said that, despite their philosophical differences, "he and Pat Buchanan actually liked each other."

Braden left the show in 1989. "I think he left because CNN thought it was time for a change and to bring in a newer, younger adversary," Buchanan said. "The truth is, I opposed Tom's leaving at the time."

Funeral arrangements had not been made Friday, but Braden is to be buried in Dubuque, Iowa, Susan Braden said.