Chris Matthews' new job with Obama admin

[rjamortega]

This was funny when I saw it this morning. Poor Chris...he considers himself a journalist, but he just can't shake off his old longtime allegiance to the Democratic party.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/11/06/odd-job-matthews-says-his-role-make-obama-presidency-success

Gee! I wonder if this could cause Olbermann to pronounce Matthews "THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD!!!"

[Fred C. Dobbs]

But remember, there's no such thing as media bias.

[rjamortega]

Matthews' admission is something that even partisans like Limbaugh and Hannity have never considered! (that I know of)

[MikeD4o7]

Matthews' admission is something that even partisans like Limbaugh and Hannity have never considered! (that I know of)

How so? I was watching Hannity and Colmes last night and he said "I wish the election had turned out differently". I don't think Hannity or Rush even themselves would try to say they're not bias.

[steveksux]

Matthews thinks he's going to be the Official Ball Washer?

Obama golfs, right?

Randy

[rjamortega]

How so? I was watching Hannity and Colmes last night and he said "I wish the election had turned out differently". I don't think Hannity or Rush even themselves would try to say they're not bias.

They have bias, and they of course report in support of Republican admins. But they also criticize when they don't like what is coming out of the Republicans.

Matthews expressly said he was going to do whatever he could to make this administration work. He even added that he would have no part in picking out anything that might be a stumbling block. He wasn't going to question anything.

[steveksux]

They have bias, and they of course report in support of Republican admins. But they also criticize when they don't like what is coming out of the Republicans.

Matthews expressly said he was going to do whatever he could to make this administration work. He even added that he would have no part in picking out anything that might be a stumbling block. He wasn't going to question anything.
If that's what he meant, he's stupid. That's what doomed Bush. Too many yes men around him. Everybody makes mistakes, but you have to figure it out, or have someone point it out, in order to correct it. And be willing to sacrifice some pride and admit it.

Randy

[rjamortega]

Holy mackerel! I would have thought any self-professed journalist who offered his job in support of an administration would have drawn some criticism or distain from colleagues!?! But Olbermann said nothing! Not one word!! Not a peep!!!

Not WORST, not WORSER.....not even WORSE PERSON IN THE WORLD!!?!!:eek: :confused:




:lol:

[IDK]

Matthews' admission is something that even partisans like Limbaugh and Hannity have never considered! (that I know of)
Now, if we put political leanings aside, the only difference between Matthews and these two blowhards you just mentioned would be that Matthews openly admitted his intentions.

This is what happens when you make the news profitable.

[serenity]

But Olbermann said nothing! Not one word!! Not a peep!!!


Olberman wouldn't. Olberman is in fact about the last person who WOULD say anything.

I had thought Olberman was some sort of speak-truth-to-power maverick. Now I know this isn't true. I was dead wrong.

After spending lots of time criticizing (correctly) the government's revision of domestic spying laws, Olberman made an abrupt and amazingly absolute about-face as soon as Obama supported this terrible, anti-democratic, anti-American, authoritarian idea.

Immediately, it was nothing to criticize; it was "proof" that Obama was courageously "standing up to the left." (I can still hardly believe it.)

It's my biggest single issue with Obama. It got less press than it should have, because McCain, who supported it as well, couldn't run with it. The Republicans in general agreed with this Big Government ideal, as they always do when taxes aren't involved, so they didn't object. The Democrats, who had an opportunity to spell out the horrors of it, either agreed with it, or wished to protect Obama, so they remained mostly silent.

I believe both parties had a few members who objected, but it didn't come to much.

So, while I disagree withe the "media in the tank for Obama" theme--I think it IS true in the case of Olberman. Obama could sexually assault someone, and Olberman would say Obama was bravely "standing up to" politically correct feminists.

[Groucho]

Eh, Hardball isn't a news show, it's an opinion show, just like Rush Limbaugh's show or Bill O'Reilly's show or Keith Olberman's show. If anyone thinks these guys are trying to be unbiased, they're fooling themselves.

Plus Matthews wants to run for Senate...

[steveksux]

And the motivation behind Matthews statement:
This country needs a successful presidency.As long as Bush was on the wrong path, criticism was necessary. Going along and supporting him was wrongheaded.

Obama, as well as Bush, deserve support when they're trying to do the right thing. And opposition when they do not.

I suppose those criticizing Matthews are supporting those like our own Bassman who hopes for an Obama failure, at whatever cost to the country, so their party can prosper?

Do all you really think Obama must be criticized an equal amount to Bush in order to prove the media is not biased?

I thought you guys believed in equal OPPORTUNITIES, not equal OUTCOMES...


Randy

[Fred C. Dobbs]

Its kind of hard to think an obsequious fawning press really presents an equal opportunity for Obama to be fairly criticized, Randy.

[steveksux]

Its kind of hard to think an obsequious fawning press really presents an equal opportunity for Obama to be fairly criticized, Randy.Its also a little hard to expect them to start critcizing until he actually does something... New Presidents always get a bit of a honeymoon period. Bush included. Some just squander it sooner than others.

Randy

[IDK]

And the motivation behind Matthews statement:
As long as Bush was on the wrong path, criticism was necessary. Going along and supporting him was wrongheaded.

Obama, as well as Bush, deserve support when they're trying to do the right thing. And opposition when they do not.

I suppose those criticizing Matthews are supporting those like our own Bassman who hopes for an Obama failure, at whatever cost to the country, so their party can prosper?

Do all you really think Obama must be criticized an equal amount to Bush in order to prove the media is not biased?

I thought you guys believed in equal OPPORTUNITIES, not equal OUTCOMES...


Randy

So the job of the press is to support a presidency until it gives reason to oppose it?

[Fred C. Dobbs]

We will soon see. I think we can expect that Obama will get more latitude than most modern presidents ever did. In the meantime we can criticize him as we see fit. There is no fairness doctrine in effect here to muzzle us....

[IDK]

We will soon see. I think we can expect that Obama will get more latitude than most modern presidents ever did. In the meantime we can criticize him as we see fit. There is no fairness doctrine in effect here to muzzle us....

What's really ironic is that had the fairness doctrine been in effect during this campaign, all the networks would have had to give McCain a 30 minute infomercial as well, regardless of whether or not he had the money.

[NiteGuy]

What's really ironic is that had the fairness doctrine been in effect during this campaign, all the networks would have had to give McCain a 30 minute infomercial as well, regardless of whether or not he had the money.

Not to mention all of the other ad time, where Obama was outspending McCain. ;)

[Fred C. Dobbs]

Yes, the FD involves all sorts of infringements of the 1st Amendment.

[luigimichele]

But remember, there's no such thing as media bias.

who said that? Of course there is media bias but it doesn't boil down to the "liberals" are going to get you! MSNBC leans left, moreso later in the day as it starts of with Morning Joe he leans right. FOX news leans right, with their own share of just as annoying right leaning spin (AKA media bias), seeming to be more pervasive within the O'Reilly, Hannity, etc. segments, and more balanced within the Hume's segment.... and so on.

Yet BOTH throughout the day also give voice to opposing views and partisans of all stripes.

CNN falls somewhere in the middle. the network houses the so called conservative independent opinion based Lou Dobbs, and now William Bennett has an his own segment. With CNN headline offering up the conservative views of what is his name ... I can't remember.

Then there are the columnists each with their own particular leanings some right some more left. I have taken to navigate between them all. In an effort to subject myself to all biases.

So the reality is within the Mainstream coexists bias from the right and the left. And in this election some very savvy conservative republicans, and neo conservatives for that matter voted for Obama. Which is evidence that he isn't a marxist nutter to the far left, or remotely terrorist sympathetic.

Only absolutists living in a surreality of it is either all good or all evil, fixate solely on the bias from the democratic side, often mischaracterizing in the most right leaning Democrats as radicals.