And I think she makes a good case as well. I happen to agree with her, but even if I didn't, there's something to be said for how well she presents her views.
I disagree with the claim that FNC isn't a proper news organization, but I will concede that Maddow makes a good point here that I haven't heard anybody else make.
I don't have a problem with individual opinion hosts (by the way, Rachel, Beck is a daytime, not prime time host) organizing and taking part in political activism. Most cable talkers do this to some degree. I DO have a problem with a cable net adopting and/or sponsoring these activities. Maddow correctly points out that Fox has crossed this line.
What's amusing to me is that this "conflict of interest" claim comes from MSNBC, whose parent company, GE, was the largest single beneficiary of government bailouts (by the Washington Post's math, not mine). GE also stands to benefit immensely from Cap and Trade and health care reform. Not to mention the fact that GE's CEO, Jeff Immelt, sits on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
How convenient that MSNBC is Obama's biggest cheerleader! How convenient that Obama gives MSNBC newsman (no5 opinion man, NEWSman) Chris Matthews a "thrill up his leg" (Feb. 2008). How appropriate that Matthews considers it "his job" to make Obama's presidency a success (Nov. 2008).
The same Chris Matthews, by the way, who earlier this month fantasized about "jamming a CO2 pellet into Rush Limbaugh's head" and watching him "explode like a giant blimp."
I agree with Maddow's point in this clip, but MSNBC is hardly in any position to take the high ground as a "news" organization.
As I think I've mentioned before, I generally don't watch or listen to commentators from either side much any more, but clips like this which are calm, rational and offer a different perspective almost convince me to start again...
I have to wonder were all this violent speech is coming from though - I didn't hear the Chris Matthew thing, but that, combined with Becks poisoning of Nancy Pelosi, and you have to start wondering where new organizations are headed.
Of course if I may be a complete hypocrite here as well... I'm not sure if you'd need a CO2 pellet in Limbaugh's head to explode it. Just send them man a couple of cases of Twinkies and he could probably get his whole body to explode all by himself!!!!!
I must admit on the whole GE/Obama thing... I can see why Obama would want people from the industry helping to strategize on how best to get the country back on the leading edge of technology....
But at the same time, one of the big draws to Obama for me was that I'd hoped he'd get rid of some of the money being thrown around in Washington. It seems like it's just coming and going from different places now, than it was under Bush.
Incidentally, while I agree with very little that Rachel Maddow says, I do enjoy watching her when I can-- mainly because she argues and debates in a very linear fashion. Linear thought brings joy to my soul.
I disagree with the claim that FNC isn't a proper news organization, but I will concede that Maddow makes a good point here that I haven't heard anybody else make.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with individual opinion hosts (by the way, Rachel, Beck is a daytime, not prime time host) organizing and taking part in political activism. Most cable talkers do this to some degree. I DO have a problem with a cable net adopting and/or sponsoring these activities. Maddow correctly points out that Fox has crossed this line.
What's amusing to me is that this "conflict of interest" claim comes from MSNBC, whose parent company, GE, was the largest single beneficiary of government bailouts (by the Washington Post's math, not mine). GE also stands to benefit immensely from Cap and Trade and health care reform. Not to mention the fact that GE's CEO, Jeff Immelt, sits on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
How convenient that MSNBC is Obama's biggest cheerleader! How convenient that Obama gives MSNBC newsman (no5 opinion man, NEWSman) Chris Matthews a "thrill up his leg" (Feb. 2008). How appropriate that Matthews considers it "his job" to make Obama's presidency a success (Nov. 2008).
The same Chris Matthews, by the way, who earlier this month fantasized about "jamming a CO2 pellet into Rush Limbaugh's head" and watching him "explode like a giant blimp."
I agree with Maddow's point in this clip, but MSNBC is hardly in any position to take the high ground as a "news" organization.
Excellent Points Mr. Sirmize!
ReplyDeleteAs I think I've mentioned before, I generally don't watch or listen to commentators from either side much any more, but clips like this which are calm, rational and offer a different perspective almost convince me to start again...
I have to wonder were all this violent speech is coming from though - I didn't hear the Chris Matthew thing, but that, combined with Becks poisoning of Nancy Pelosi, and you have to start wondering where new organizations are headed.
Of course if I may be a complete hypocrite here as well... I'm not sure if you'd need a CO2 pellet in Limbaugh's head to explode it. Just send them man a couple of cases of Twinkies and he could probably get his whole body to explode all by himself!!!!!
I must admit on the whole GE/Obama thing... I can see why Obama would want people from the industry helping to strategize on how best to get the country back on the leading edge of technology....
But at the same time, one of the big draws to Obama for me was that I'd hoped he'd get rid of some of the money being thrown around in Washington. It seems like it's just coming and going from different places now, than it was under Bush.
Incidentally, while I agree with very little that Rachel Maddow says, I do enjoy watching her when I can-- mainly because she argues and debates in a very linear fashion. Linear thought brings joy to my soul.
ReplyDelete