Matthews was just here in Iowa for a speech. I should have gone and kicked his shins.
Posted by idiosynchronic at January 20, 2006 07:34 AMI guess the truth hurts, huh? It will be interesting to see how this view reverberates with the voting public.
Posted by Stats at January 20, 2006 07:38 AMhttp://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06020/641039.stm
Pittsburg Post Gazette: President has no respect for the law.
Posted by at January 20, 2006 07:56 AMI don't know why Daou included Gibson in his string...Gibson is on record saying that he admires Michael Moore's work.
And Gibson is responsible for "Braveheart", the ultimate "Fuck the Tyrant" movie.
Hell, even the "Passion of the Christ", which Moore praised, is an idictment of state and group power, evil and mindlessness run amok.
No, I think the real dichotomy here is between thinking people and boorish regurgitators of state spin.
Posted by God Of War at January 20, 2006 07:59 AMStats - you want the truth? The truth is the BushCo clans relationship with the Saudi Royal family has enabled them (the Saudis) to gain 15% of our oil market. This in turn has allowed them to buy off the radical Islamic world and fund the Madras shools that teach hatred of the west. In other words BushCo business funds the murder of Americans. Now go look in your loved ones in eye and tell them your are a good person.
Posted by The Truth at January 20, 2006 08:01 AMExactly.
I've been thinking for a long time that the progressive blogoshere should designate one blogger, and one only (could rotate I suppose), to monitor and watch tweetie and his ilk to recap for the rest of us. I simply cannot watch the jerks, and if I even accidentally get exposed I feel guilty for the possibility of pumping their ratings. You have the answer, don't watch, and just as important, get other progressives to stay off their shows. Expose them after the fact with The Tweetie Patrol.
Posted by james at January 20, 2006 08:07 AMStats:
You're the same identity-challenged poster who can't decide between "Stats", "Lefty", or "Skeptic" as your name here.
And you want to lecture us on "the truth?"
Posted by Steve Soto at January 20, 2006 08:13 AMSomewhat off topic: Why the hell did Senator Reid back down from his attack on the GOP? This a.m. the WashPo has a story about Reid apologizing to GOP senators for smearing them by claiming that the GOP can not be trusted to correct the culture of corruption in D.C. What the....? Why did he back down?
Posted by tersuki at January 20, 2006 08:15 AMIt was on Washington Journal too... No way should he have apologized. They had a reporter from USA Today reinforce the GOPinion that it was on government letterhead so it was "wrong" or "bad" or whatever. This is all so ridiculous. Matthews harping on whippings and slavery and Hillary. Osama creeping up again. No coverage to Gore. No coverage to Abramoff... no 'news' ever. When was the last time the 'real media' broke a story?
Posted by Josh at January 20, 2006 08:20 AMWhat makes Matthews' comment all the more incomprehensible is that soon after Fahrenheit 9/11 was released, Matthews chastised Republican and conservative guests who were on his show who were condemning Fahrenheit 9/11 even though they had not seen the film. Matthews praised the film, citing the fact that Moore had made some valid points in the film, and urged them to go see the documentary so they could determine what Moore had to say. Perhaps the reason that Matthews has turned 180 degrees on Moore is that Matthews' corporate masters have warned Matthews that if he does not begin to be more critical of liberals on his show, they will reduce the handsome salary that he makes and he will no longer be able to afford his 4.4 million dollar home.
Posted by Erroll at January 20, 2006 08:25 AMI have been scrutinizing Tweety with my RIGHT eye lately, and agree he has mysteriously moved right. He headlined the show with that Hillory remark, and then beat it enough to make a dead horse cringe. He worships his ego by playing those S.N.L. parody clips OVER, and OVER. Sadly, he's turning into another O'Riley.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 20, 2006 09:15 AMErroll:
Yes you got it right. Many reporters and TV hosts are intimidated by the owners of the stations who have their loyalties to Republican party. We are seeing begining of an end to the world's finest democracy because the free press is the life blood of any democracy.
The US press stopped being "Free" when it was prevented from showing pictures of coffins of our soldiers returning from Iraq. It did not happen during Vietnam war.
The worst thing that Right Wing did to US is not Iraq. It is the infection of Cancer on our democracy.
Posted by suresh at January 20, 2006 09:26 AMRe tersuki's question above. This is completely paranoid but I wonder if information being gathered via FISA-less wiretaps is being used to intimidate the Administration's opponents. It wouldn't be the first time that happened in America (i.e. the FBI's Hoover).
Posted by Paul Lucic at January 20, 2006 09:43 AMThis is completely paranoid but I wonder if information being gathered via FISA-less wiretaps is being used to intimidate the Administration's opponents.
Doesn't sound pranoid to me. not "completely" , anyway. Why would they bypass the courts unless they knew the courts wouldn't approve the wiretaps?
Posted by benjoya at January 20, 2006 10:19 AMThe free press has been termed "the forth estate" meaning that the press is comparable to being the forth branch of government, keeping checks on all of the other three. Unfortunately in today reality, it simply means that the forth branch of government has been taken over by the neo-cons, just like the other three. The MSM, like the congress, and the SCOTUS have all abdicated their responsibilty, and now we live in a one party state. Can you say USSR?
Posted by Oaklander at January 20, 2006 10:44 AMWe have no press anymore, much less a free press. It's all entertainment these days. That's why they hire the pretty faces who can speak the script handed to them, but not much more. Don Henley called it right in "Dirty Laundry" almost 25 years ago. All of the talking heads are dead these days. They just don't know it.
Posted by PrahaPartizan at January 20, 2006 11:01 AMWatching cable news is on par with watching Jerry Springer and the world wrestling association. In all cases, the viewers are being jerked off.
Posted by smooth at January 20, 2006 11:45 AMI don't think that the MSM is necessarily pro-republican as much as they are pro-corporate. (If that distinction can be made.)
If someone gets most of their news from the corporate media, their world view is undoubtedly biased toward the military-industrial complex and toward Israel.
Any argument?
Posted by brisa at January 20, 2006 11:54 AMHas been obvious for years to most people but Chris Mathews.
Posted by Marie at January 20, 2006 12:00 PMbrisa, I agree but lean to thinking of more pro-portfolio, capitalism. So if that means speaking up on behalf of corporate America then it must equate. I mean, if their investments are going to take a hit they aren't going to do a story to sabotage it. God forbid that truth in journalism would get in the way of making a buck. I suspect they are human or some sort of species of sub-human so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe by the time you make it to MSM your making so much money you don't have to look back at what really is good for society as whole. I could see how that would skewer your outlook.
Posted by bbtb at January 20, 2006 02:32 PMIf the MSM were merely pro-corporate as oppposed to pro-republican, then why would Chris Mathews make such vile remarks about Michael Moore? After all, he's not anti corporation per se; only in how it contributes to political corruption, and and flaunts workers rights and safety. He has made it plainly evident however, that he is vehemently anti-Bush. And that's were he went afoul of the MSM. Bowling for Collumbine certainly didn't garner the kind of hostility that Farenheit 9/11 did. And yet all he did was tell the truth.
Posted by Oaklander at January 20, 2006 02:57 PMWe know that their are plenty of republican MSM whores. I will not give them the benefit of doubt, Matthews falls into this category. I just think that overall, once these guys/gals get to MSM, say CNN, they forget where they came from or what got them there. Integrity is one example, as long as they can say to their friends, "I was invited to the White House dinner party", they lose all integrity for their job. It becomes bragging rights. Pathetic, but it sounds like a big deal to some people. We don't have to mention money, because we know that a bunch of them are already on the repukes payroll. So it gets back to who is the payroll behind this, corporate America.
Steve, God love ya. Great smack down of stats, aka, lefty and skeptic.
Posted by Judith at January 20, 2006 05:33 PM"The US press stopped being "Free" when it was prevented from showing pictures of coffins of our soldiers returning from Iraq. It did not happen during Vietnam war."
Suresh, you are absolutely right. The media should have never agreed to censor those pictures. However, the Administration does not want people to see death in it's raw form. Hard to happy talk when visuals say otherwide.
"This is completely paranoid but I wonder if information being gathered via FISA-less wiretaps is being used to intimidate the Administration's opponents. It wouldn't be the first time that happened in America (i.e. the FBI's Hoover)."
Paul Lucic, of course the wiretaps are being used to intimidate opponents, the press, politicians, anyone of their choosing. The dossiers on people didn't die with Hoover.