Beating Up On President Bush: MSNBC Has Crossed the Line!
Dennis Copson
December 20, 2008
The liberal press - which is now most of that establishment - in general, has always had it in for President Bush. However, I have noticed of late they are picking up the pace in so doing to the point where it has become patently obvious and blatant. Have they decided to get in their last licks during the few remaining days of the 43rd President´s term? It certainly seems such is the case – on certain networks at least.
MSNBC´s talking heads, giddy in their celebration of Barack Obama winning the election, are especially guilty of muckraking and baseness. In viewing their prime time shows it is evident they are bound to use whatever time is left in the waning days of the Bush Presidency to denigrate and pounce on what remains of an eight year term to have a last whack at the pińata.
I have been watching MSNBC more in the last few weeks than I normally would do. My observations have led me to conclude there is a newly concentrated effort to denigrate the President and his team to a degree that it is embarrassingly apparent. The latest attacks are centered on the topic of torture – especially Dick Chaney´s role in approving waterboarding for the worst of the worst Al Qaeda captives.
The worst transgressors of biased reporting have been – in order of their vileness – Keith Olbermann (Countdown), Rachel Maddow (The Rachel Maddow Show), and running a close third, Chris Matthews (Hardball). These ultra lefties, particularly Olbermann and Maddow, have gone so far in their pursuit of continuing to disparage President Bush that no attempt is even made to disguise their contempt. They headline their programs with anything anti - Bush that they can conjure up – objectivity be damned.
Today, December 18th, Chris Matthews spent the first fifteen minutes on Vice President Dick Cheney´s and the President´s role in torture while in office. He and his cohorts have taken on this aspect of the Bush Presidency with a vengeance lately as if they were attempting to get an indictment in a court of law. In fact, they have suggested that. (This when other top stories were seemingly more in the headlines such as Caroline Kennedy´s pursuit of the New York Senate appointment and the Illinois governor´s quandary.)
Matthews´ guests were Congressman Duncan Hunter of CA and the ultra liberal Jim Moran of VA. The segment was basically Mathews and Moran beating the drum against Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld while Hunter was allowed a sparingly few minutes of rebuttal. Certainly not ´fair and balanced´ news by a long shot.
Matthews has been hot on this topic all week as he seems bent on repeating the same argument each day at length to the point of being boring and unflattering of his supposed obligation to relate the facts as well as his opinion of the subject. Is it now a newsman / commentator´s position to sound off so strongly on his personal opinion? I think not. He has every right to comment and opine to some degree. Is it an allowable posture to ´sell´ his views to the public watching him? Not if the rules of good journalism apply.
However, since at least this spring when the press, for the most part, became participants in electing Barack Obama to the office of President vice ´reporters and analyzers´ of their chosen Democrat and his campaign, Mathews, et al, have relinquished their objectivity to an increasingly alarming degree. And now they have gone over the top.
The vilest of all has to be Keith Olbermann who has been a Bush - hater for all eight years of his Presidency and makes no bones about it. In fact, Olbermann goes far beyond the pale in his nightly attacks on GW. He closes each night with "That is Countdown for this, the xxxx day since the declaration of ´Mission Accomplished´ in Iraq." - a subtle belittling of the President who never uttered any such remark.
He is immediately followed in prime time, albeit amateurishly, by his personally ordained female clone, Rachel Maddow, who´s giggling deportment demeans the profession nightly. And to think, she replaced Dan Abrams! Who´s in charge there, anyway?
On December 18th, same day as Matthews´ show, she was very concerned with Obama´s choice of pastor for his inauguration ceremony. This took up the preponderance of her giggle – show except today she wasn´t laughing much. It seems Barack has picked a pastor from California who had supported Proposition 8 which passed in the recent election and did not support gay marriage in California; it was passed by voters by a considerable majority. It apparently did not sit well with her that Barack´s choice of an inaugural reverend was not in line with her sexual preference or views. Too bad, Ms Liberal Commentator of the Church of the Lesbian Persuasion, you have to live with what the voters chose! And that vote was that only men and women can marry in the State of California. As for the reverend and his support of Proposition 8, let us remember that he is the leader of his flock; it is his job to point them in the direction he deems right by the moral compass. If Maddow disagrees, so be it. But I see no reason for her to have any say in Barack´s choice of who speaks at his swearing in nor is it any of her business.
This pair, Olbermann and Maddow, subjects us to two full hours of unrelenting – and mostly unfounded - Bush - hating and other far left views like no other seen on television.
Tim Russert´s death this summer is noticeable in the lack of decorum now at MSNBC. He would never have allowed Maddow an hour of prime time to giggle her way through the news of the day. Never! And, while alive he had a collar on Olbermann to the extent that I am certain that Olbermann spent some time in the woodshed with the professional Russert as he always espoused professionalism in his beloved field of journalism and political commentating – always.
While Olbermann has seemingly challenged Russert´s ways, Matthews had an abundance of admiration and deference to Russert; he seemed to learn from Tim´s example and glean what he could from the respected Russert. With the untimely passing of Tim, Matthews is drifting from that steadfast guidance now in his nightly show, becoming rude and irascible on air, and losing his way in the field of good journalism. He is becoming more Keith-like perhaps in his pursuit of Olbermann´s own ratings rise.
Older, tenured members of the NBC news team have commented openly on the current situation at MSNBC. Tom Brokaw, the lion of NBC News in days past, recently commented on the question of faltering objectivity and bias on MSNBC by stating of Matthews and Olbermann: "… I think Keith has gone too far. I think Chris has gone too far…(they are) not the only voices on MSNBC…."
Soft shoe? No, not when you consider the influence and respect Brokaw has in the news industry. He was publicly chastising them in hopes they would take the hint. Brokaw apparently doesn´t think news has to be vindictive and opinionated to a degree it loses its effectiveness. Too bad his admonishment has gone unheeded.
And, I suspect, he cringes when he views Maddow´s giddy, inept attempt at the nightly news.
Me, too.
The fourth estate is provided with considerable leeway in our Constitution and they have always relied on that. Nothing has changed and nothing now impedes those protections. However, even the press can overdo it when they cross established boundaries in their speech. Worse yet, they are not in consonance with the populace when they become so overcome with their own import once that they fail to recognize what is expected of them in their daily endeavor to fairly, objectively, and in an unbiased manner report the news. No wonder they have less of a vote of confidence of the American people than even Congress!
MSNBC´s talking heads, giddy in their celebration of Barack Obama winning the election, are especially guilty of muckraking and baseness. In viewing their prime time shows it is evident they are bound to use whatever time is left in the waning days of the Bush Presidency to denigrate and pounce on what remains of an eight year term to have a last whack at the pińata.
I have been watching MSNBC more in the last few weeks than I normally would do. My observations have led me to conclude there is a newly concentrated effort to denigrate the President and his team to a degree that it is embarrassingly apparent. The latest attacks are centered on the topic of torture – especially Dick Chaney´s role in approving waterboarding for the worst of the worst Al Qaeda captives.
The worst transgressors of biased reporting have been – in order of their vileness – Keith Olbermann (Countdown), Rachel Maddow (The Rachel Maddow Show), and running a close third, Chris Matthews (Hardball). These ultra lefties, particularly Olbermann and Maddow, have gone so far in their pursuit of continuing to disparage President Bush that no attempt is even made to disguise their contempt. They headline their programs with anything anti - Bush that they can conjure up – objectivity be damned.
Today, December 18th, Chris Matthews spent the first fifteen minutes on Vice President Dick Cheney´s and the President´s role in torture while in office. He and his cohorts have taken on this aspect of the Bush Presidency with a vengeance lately as if they were attempting to get an indictment in a court of law. In fact, they have suggested that. (This when other top stories were seemingly more in the headlines such as Caroline Kennedy´s pursuit of the New York Senate appointment and the Illinois governor´s quandary.)
Matthews´ guests were Congressman Duncan Hunter of CA and the ultra liberal Jim Moran of VA. The segment was basically Mathews and Moran beating the drum against Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld while Hunter was allowed a sparingly few minutes of rebuttal. Certainly not ´fair and balanced´ news by a long shot.
Matthews has been hot on this topic all week as he seems bent on repeating the same argument each day at length to the point of being boring and unflattering of his supposed obligation to relate the facts as well as his opinion of the subject. Is it now a newsman / commentator´s position to sound off so strongly on his personal opinion? I think not. He has every right to comment and opine to some degree. Is it an allowable posture to ´sell´ his views to the public watching him? Not if the rules of good journalism apply.
However, since at least this spring when the press, for the most part, became participants in electing Barack Obama to the office of President vice ´reporters and analyzers´ of their chosen Democrat and his campaign, Mathews, et al, have relinquished their objectivity to an increasingly alarming degree. And now they have gone over the top.
The vilest of all has to be Keith Olbermann who has been a Bush - hater for all eight years of his Presidency and makes no bones about it. In fact, Olbermann goes far beyond the pale in his nightly attacks on GW. He closes each night with "That is Countdown for this, the xxxx day since the declaration of ´Mission Accomplished´ in Iraq." - a subtle belittling of the President who never uttered any such remark.
He is immediately followed in prime time, albeit amateurishly, by his personally ordained female clone, Rachel Maddow, who´s giggling deportment demeans the profession nightly. And to think, she replaced Dan Abrams! Who´s in charge there, anyway?
On December 18th, same day as Matthews´ show, she was very concerned with Obama´s choice of pastor for his inauguration ceremony. This took up the preponderance of her giggle – show except today she wasn´t laughing much. It seems Barack has picked a pastor from California who had supported Proposition 8 which passed in the recent election and did not support gay marriage in California; it was passed by voters by a considerable majority. It apparently did not sit well with her that Barack´s choice of an inaugural reverend was not in line with her sexual preference or views. Too bad, Ms Liberal Commentator of the Church of the Lesbian Persuasion, you have to live with what the voters chose! And that vote was that only men and women can marry in the State of California. As for the reverend and his support of Proposition 8, let us remember that he is the leader of his flock; it is his job to point them in the direction he deems right by the moral compass. If Maddow disagrees, so be it. But I see no reason for her to have any say in Barack´s choice of who speaks at his swearing in nor is it any of her business.
This pair, Olbermann and Maddow, subjects us to two full hours of unrelenting – and mostly unfounded - Bush - hating and other far left views like no other seen on television.
Tim Russert´s death this summer is noticeable in the lack of decorum now at MSNBC. He would never have allowed Maddow an hour of prime time to giggle her way through the news of the day. Never! And, while alive he had a collar on Olbermann to the extent that I am certain that Olbermann spent some time in the woodshed with the professional Russert as he always espoused professionalism in his beloved field of journalism and political commentating – always.
While Olbermann has seemingly challenged Russert´s ways, Matthews had an abundance of admiration and deference to Russert; he seemed to learn from Tim´s example and glean what he could from the respected Russert. With the untimely passing of Tim, Matthews is drifting from that steadfast guidance now in his nightly show, becoming rude and irascible on air, and losing his way in the field of good journalism. He is becoming more Keith-like perhaps in his pursuit of Olbermann´s own ratings rise.
Older, tenured members of the NBC news team have commented openly on the current situation at MSNBC. Tom Brokaw, the lion of NBC News in days past, recently commented on the question of faltering objectivity and bias on MSNBC by stating of Matthews and Olbermann: "… I think Keith has gone too far. I think Chris has gone too far…(they are) not the only voices on MSNBC…."
Soft shoe? No, not when you consider the influence and respect Brokaw has in the news industry. He was publicly chastising them in hopes they would take the hint. Brokaw apparently doesn´t think news has to be vindictive and opinionated to a degree it loses its effectiveness. Too bad his admonishment has gone unheeded.
And, I suspect, he cringes when he views Maddow´s giddy, inept attempt at the nightly news.
Me, too.
The fourth estate is provided with considerable leeway in our Constitution and they have always relied on that. Nothing has changed and nothing now impedes those protections. However, even the press can overdo it when they cross established boundaries in their speech. Worse yet, they are not in consonance with the populace when they become so overcome with their own import once that they fail to recognize what is expected of them in their daily endeavor to fairly, objectively, and in an unbiased manner report the news. No wonder they have less of a vote of confidence of the American people than even Congress!
Print
Email
