Friday, January 11, 2008

So Who's Fair & Balanced Now?

My friends on the left are constantly putting down Fox News, and sometimes (not often) they have a valid point. I Just hope they were watching Bill O’Reilly Wednesday evening. O’Reilly was discussing a comment made by Chris Matthews at MSNBC. These are Matthews comments from Wednesday morning:

"Lets not forget, and I’ll be brutal, the reason she's a U.S. Senator, the reason she's a candidate for President, the reason she may be a front-runner, is her husband messed around. That's how she got to be Senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win it on the merits..."

So how did Bill O’Reilly, a member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy (VRWC) at the evil Mothership respond to this allegation: “NBC is a very powerful network, and we have said for years that this network is not fair and it has an agenda a mile long, and now I think their own people are admitting it. Now Mr. Matthews has ever right to say what he wants to say because he is not a reporter, he is a commentator, as I am. But it’s rough, it’s rough business what these people are doing over there. We don’t do that here. We would never say that Senator Clinton got her job because her husband “messed around”. I mean that is, that is a personal attack, and it is questionable whether a network should allow that or not. Senator Clinton, whether you like her or not, is a sitting senator who earned her position by winning the election in New York. And for somebody to denigrate her like that is stunning.”

Look, Matthews worked for four Democratic politicians. He worked in the Senate for five years on the staffs of Senators Frank Moss and Edmund Muskie before himself campaigning (and failing) for a seat in the House of Representatives. He was a presidential speechwriting for four years during the Carter administration, and later worked six years as a top aide to long-time Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill. In other words, we are not talking about a member of the VRWC here.

In a related story (related due to the fact that it involves the media and a candidate), Lee Cowan, the NBC News correspondent covering Barrack Obama said this about covering Obama: “You know I think from a reporters point of view it’s almost hard to remain objective because it’s infectious

To which NBC News Anchor Brian Williams, speaking on MSNBC, responded: “I interviewed Lee Cowan, our reporter who covers Obama while I was out yesterday, we posted the interview on the web, and Lee says to me “It’s hard to stay objective covering this guy” and it was very courageous for Lee to say that to be honest.”

Courageous? Look, I’ll be the first to admit that Obama is a very infectious man, but basically what this reporter is telling us is that he (the reporter) is no longer objective. If this was a Republican candidate he’d be yanked by the network in a minute, and here the Network anchor is calling this guy courageous. Huh? And okay, I’ll be the first to admit that “Infectious” is probably not an adjective we’ll be hearing regarding the Republican field anytime soon.

On another “Media” note, I spent some time in the car on Wednesday, which means I spent time listening to talk radio, mainly Air America. There was a great deal of discussion regarding the Iranian speedboats that approached and potentially threatened US warships in the Straight of Hormuz, and both the commentators and the callers spent more time blaming the incident on the US, and giving Iran a pass.

While this bother bothered and amazed me, imagine my shock when I found similar comments on the blog of my good friend Chris. Yes, Chris is a liberal, and yes, liberals have shown themselves to let their hatred of George Bush cloud common sense, but I’ve always felt Chris was to smart for that. Yet here he is, questioning the US Navy, and giving credence to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, an organization that was labeled a terrorist organization by the US Congress by a vote of 76 to 22. I realize that Chris’s candidate – Barack Obama – did not vote for the resolution, but he did not vote against it either.

Could this be a staged event by the Bush administration in order to drum up support for attacking Iran? Sure it could be. Could Bill Clinton be the Zodiac Killer? Well, they never found the guy, so he could be…. But why would your mind go there? Look, if this turns out to be a staged event – which I highly doubt – I’ll be screaming at the top of my lungs along with Chris calling for Bush’s impeachment. But if it WASN'T a staged event, I doubt that those on the left will be screaming they were wrong.

Of course Chris’s response was that there is a history of George Bush lying to get us into war. I asked Chris for the proof that Bush knowingly misled us. Chris’s response: “Why don't you show me some proof that there wasn't bad intelligence. The burden of proof is on your side”. Wow. Guilty until proven innocent. Ladies and gentleman, I give you the American Left.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

More than six years ago, long before Hillary Clinton began running for president, the Philadelphia Inquirer magazine reported that, according to an MSNBC colleague, Matthews had said of Clinton: "I hate her. I hate her. All that she stands for." So the liberal press has that going for it.

Funny how you left out your weak arguments that lead me to say the burden of proof was on your side when you presented your readers with "the American Left" That's okay, I still love ya Bob.