I began with two tweets to Rick.
2:04 PM "@ricksanchezcnn. Since Congress & the White House rely on taxpayer $ to stay afloat, shouldn't they take a 90% pay cut too?"
2:09 PM "@ricksanchezcnn How many of those 7 firms have already TRIED to pay the taxpayers back but were NOT ALLOWED TO DO SO by Obama?"
These are CLEARLY pro-CEO-bonuses (actually, pro-sanctity-of-contract).
I don't have an exact time for Rick's comments, because I can't find a YouTube video of the show, but I do know Rick's first comment relevant to this came after my second tweet and before my third.
According to the show transcript:
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.Boy, you guys are -- we call this a national conversation and let me tell you something. The nation is conversing
and all of you to a man and to a woman seem to be angry at these big Wall Street fat cats.
I knew this was clearly a lie, considering I myself had tweeted twice taking the side Rick claimed nobody was taking. I didn't have access to Twitter at the time (cheap cellphone; can't surf the net with it) but I could surmise that I surely wasn't the only one, either.
2:16 PM "@ricksanchezcnn just outright lied, said ALL his Twitterers 'TO A MAN' were angry abt corp bonuses."
I honestly thought Rick would take this opportunity to go back and correct his
(I'm fairly certain this Sanchez quote came after my 2:16 tweet but before my 2:28 one.)
SANCHEZ: By the way, I'm still waiting.
Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of CNN.
I'm still waiting for one person to Twitter me since this show began -- maybe it will be you -- Twitter me if you believe that the Wall Street bankers should get their bonuses, because I swear, I have yet to get one person who's backing the bankers on this thing. I have never seen a situation where it's quite so one-sided.
In fact, look. Look at this one that we got just a little while ago during the break. It's another one. And it seems to say the same thing. "Look, if you get government money, all deals are off. No big paycheck until you pay off the debt." That seems to be what everybody is saying.
I would be interested. Again, if you're out there and you believe that the bankers should be getting their bonuses, send me a tweet. I would like to hear what you have to say. Maybe you can even things up. Oh, I doubt it.
I sent another.
2:28 PM "@ricksanchezcnn The CEOs should be paid what they're owed. Dodd, at Obama's urging, put in the loopholes that demanded it, remember?"
SANCHEZ: Let me share a couple more on the Twitter page, if we possibly can. There you go. "What the bankers should be getting is a nice kick in their rear end."
And underneath that: "You're nuts. No one's going to fight for these bankers." There you go. If you're serious, I'm serious. Let me know. If you think that you can explain a cogent reason why these bankers should get their money, send me a tweet and we will put it on right away.
2:46 PM "@ricksanchezcnn Ppl who get welfare still have to honor their contracts. So why shouldn't bailout corps have to honor their contracts to CEOs?"
2:51 PM "@ricksanchezcnn Out of the last 50 years, how many years has the US gone further in the red? Where's THEIR [i.e. the govt] 90% pay cut?"
Rick didn't put any of them on. Which means "we will put it on right away" is ALSO a lie. He did manage to put an @MikeBates tweet on, so I know it wasn't a case of getting lazy late in the show and not putting on any new tweets, which sometimes happens.
It's not a situation where Rick didn't see my Tweets. He has, on several occasions, had no problem finding my tweets and putting them on the air.
Spin is one thing; we are talking about bald-faced lying. He deliberately, blatantly lied. And I called him out on it.
I watched yesterday, to see if he might, just MIGHT grow a little integrity and admit that he lied (he sure had no problem calling out FOX for what he perceived as a lie, now did he?) or at least retract the claim that his Tweeters TO A MAN AND TO A WOMAN were angry about the bonuses.
But he didn't.
And because of that, I will no longer watch his show.
And I'm in the process of composing an email to CNN explaining WHY I will no longer watch his show.
Participation implies endorsement, and I do not endorse his lying. I will no longer loan him my legitimacy by participating in his little charade.