So on Friday’s Hardball, Norah O’Donnell was quivering with outrage because the Dems haven’t yet done anything to get the U.S. out of Iraq. Via Crooks and Liars, Georgia10 says that today Norah was quivering with outrage because the Dems have a plan to get the U.S. out of Iraq.
Today on The Chris Matthews Show, MSNBC’s Chief Washington correspondent, Norah O’Donnell discussed the Democrats’ call for a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. She appeared absolutely flabbergasted as to why Democrats were proposing such a plan. You can watch the video courtesy of C&L here. She just couldn’t seem to wrap her head around why Democrats are proposing withdrawal since they’ll “wind up looking weak on national security.” She presented the idea of a 2007 phased withdrawal as some irresponsible or crazy notion that foreign policy and military experts wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole:
The problem for the Democrats, once again, is that they wind up–even though they were validated somewhat in their message by the election–they wind up looking weak on national security because what they’re proposing is essentially a pull-out in 4-6 months. There is not one military or foreign policy expert who thinks you could actually feasibly do that and second that it would be a good idea. So why are they proposing that? And they’re going to put it forward and they’re going to create a vote probably on the floor and then they aren’t–even though they want to push that, they won’t put the muscle behind it by saying we’ll cut funds…Anyway, it’s an empty proposal.
First off, several military and foreign policy experts have already called for a phased withdrawal ASAP. Georgia10 listed these (all retired): Gen. Wesley Clark, Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard Jr., Brig. Gen. John H. Johns, and Maj. Gen. William Nash, among others.
And second — jeez, Norah, make up your bleeping mind.
Controversy is how cable news gets its ratings from viewers. If journalists today would stick to facts and analysis, who would want to watch them? Totally boring. Rush has it right, today’s media is ‘drive by’. They put stuff out there like a hail of bullets in order to do nothing more than stir the pot, and then someone with sense has to come in behind them and clean it all up. Why anyone expects more of journalists today, especially the cable variety is anybody’s guess. I gave up on the MSM during the 2000 election when I would hear Al Gore say one thing and then when the journalists would report on what he had said, they would get it wrong or totally out of context. The media may be liberal, but that’s not the most important thing to remember about them. The most important thing to remember about them is they will do anything for ratings.
marjam — I guess Rush would know about the “drive by” thing, since that’s his modus operandi. The problem is that the media doesn’t clean itself up. And the media ain’t liberal. That’s a myth.
RE: The media isn’t liberal. Most journalists are registered Democrats – however, the media is more corporate than anything else. And yes, Rush would know since he does it all the time. The trick is to find the grain of truth, and there is one in that the MSM is totally without conscience, scruples or principles.
Most journalists are registered Democrats – however, the media is more corporate than anything else.
It may be that most journalists are registered Democrats, but the same murky conventional wisdom says that most publishers are Republicans. And guess who gets to decide what goes in the newspapers?
Most of the “most journalists are Democrats” data comes from a self-selecting poll conducted several years ago, btw. By now most of the people who responded to that poll are retired or dead. Whether younger journalists are still mostly registered Democrats (or even if the original poll was accurate, given the methodology) I cannot say. Possibly they still are. But it doesn’t matter. Liberal is as liberal does, and the MSM has had a decidedly rightward slant for many years.
I don’t know if we should be swallowing the assumption that what is prevalent on cable/radio/news/talking head/punditry is actually journalism.
What I hear in the rare moment when I actually watch tv at someone’s house [having no tv at mine] is a tad bit of the journaling of fact followed immediately by too much ‘ism’ing blather. It is like any new ‘fact event’ is only a prop for the overwhelming ‘ism’ing. This journal-ism imbalance spins sensibilities so fast that it overwhelms the moment when a person could consider ‘fact’ with one’s own brain power. I don’t know if this overwhelming is done on purpose for 1]kissing media corporate asses, or for 2]boosting ratings through hype, but it is not really journalism.
We do need a new category for these ‘ism-ers’ like Norah et al. They have robbed journalism of its good name and function, so I would call them usurpions.
Neither HardBall nor The Chris Matthews Show are, strictly speaking, anything other than opinionating, preferably with an “edge” — more so on HardBall, but still. Nora has to “quiver with outrage” no matter what Democrats do or say, because that’s the schtick, has been for a decade or more: Democrats are wrong because Democrats are. That’s how the Beltway Media has been socialized and it’s not going to change any time soon.
Secondly, what was Nora prattling about on The Chris Matthews Show anyway? It was obvious she was blowing smoke. She has no supporting evidence for her claim that Dems are going to do what she says, and the more she was challenged about it, the more she flailed. She wasn’t just stating her opinion, in other words, she was repeating a right wing talking point straight from Sean Hannity’s pie hole. She should have been challenged on that, but she wasn’t, and the gatekeepers of American Discourse aren’t to that point yet. Sean and his ilk are still powerful players, and fear of his wrath is abundant.
She can huff and puff all she wants. She is a fool.