Considering that the rules of baseball guarantee even the greenest rookie a fair whack at a pitch, shouldn't MSNBC drop the fake pretense of Hardball with Chris Matthews and adopt a more accurate title, like Bully Pulpit?
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Saturday, September 18, 2004
Twenty Questions
Aside from Fox News Sunday, will any of the Sunday news programs explore the connection between Wild Bill Burkett and Mad Max Cleland? Why has contributor Susan Estrich all but disappeared from Fox programming since publication of her infamous syndicated column, which on the eve of Dan Rather's Big Whopper speculated about scandals that could damage George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and hinted at more dirt to come? Has Bob Beckel taken her slot as the Fox house Democrat? What did Susan know and when did she know it?
Do Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly patronize the same hatmaker these days? When Sean admonished Republicans not to get too cocky in the wake of recent polling data, did he consider heeding his own advice?
Will Wolf Blitzer invite Bob Dole back to appear on Late Edition before the election? If so, will Wolf be wearing his black blazer or does he own any other jackets? Is anyone else distracted by his ever-present black blazer? Is that why Joe Biden repeatedly called him Wolf Blazer on the November 24, 2002 broadcast? When will CNN bring back the Late Edition roundtable featuring Jonah Goldberg, Donna Brazile, Peter Beinart, Robert George, et al? Is there a clause in David Dreier's contract as a roving pundit that requires equal time for Charlie Rangel?
Will MSNBC let Joe Scarborough be Joe Scarborough? Did they hire a center-right Republican merely to silence the critics who crowed that MSNBC was all liberal all the time? Why not rename his show Scarecrow Country then? Has anyone counted the number of times Joe asked his guests, "What does John Kerry have to do to win this election?” Doesn’t MSNBC owe its election year ratings creep past CNN to the Bush haters? Has Pat Buchanan, the Ghost of Paleocons Past, gotten so much MSNBC face time because he feeds the false stereotype of the angry, anti-immigration, anti-Israel conservative?
Is there anyone better qualified to host a national talk show than Hugh Hewitt, the Czar of the Blogosphere who possesses impeccable multimedia credentials, a wealth of experience and contacts inside and outside of the beltway, and the unique ability to bridge the gap between old media and new media? Wouldn't MSNBC, which once had pretensions of wedding information technology with telejournalism, be smart to offer Hugh his own show?
Do Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly patronize the same hatmaker these days? When Sean admonished Republicans not to get too cocky in the wake of recent polling data, did he consider heeding his own advice?
Will Wolf Blitzer invite Bob Dole back to appear on Late Edition before the election? If so, will Wolf be wearing his black blazer or does he own any other jackets? Is anyone else distracted by his ever-present black blazer? Is that why Joe Biden repeatedly called him Wolf Blazer on the November 24, 2002 broadcast? When will CNN bring back the Late Edition roundtable featuring Jonah Goldberg, Donna Brazile, Peter Beinart, Robert George, et al? Is there a clause in David Dreier's contract as a roving pundit that requires equal time for Charlie Rangel?
Will MSNBC let Joe Scarborough be Joe Scarborough? Did they hire a center-right Republican merely to silence the critics who crowed that MSNBC was all liberal all the time? Why not rename his show Scarecrow Country then? Has anyone counted the number of times Joe asked his guests, "What does John Kerry have to do to win this election?” Doesn’t MSNBC owe its election year ratings creep past CNN to the Bush haters? Has Pat Buchanan, the Ghost of Paleocons Past, gotten so much MSNBC face time because he feeds the false stereotype of the angry, anti-immigration, anti-Israel conservative?
Is there anyone better qualified to host a national talk show than Hugh Hewitt, the Czar of the Blogosphere who possesses impeccable multimedia credentials, a wealth of experience and contacts inside and outside of the beltway, and the unique ability to bridge the gap between old media and new media? Wouldn't MSNBC, which once had pretensions of wedding information technology with telejournalism, be smart to offer Hugh his own show?
Thursday, September 02, 2004
Silver Lining
Ron Silver, J. C. Watts and Zell Miller were the only reasons to watch MSNBC this week; dittos for Mo Rocca on CNN. Silver is a revelation: charming, quick-witted, and personable even when shutting Janeane Garofalo up. Quick, dump Joe Scarborough and get this man a talk show.
Give 'Em Zell
Pundits, even those on my side, admire smooth, clever wordplay delivered with finesse. President Ronald Reagan was the master without equal, but what made him so persuasive was that he employed his rhetorical skills to express truths in which he believed unapologetically.
Last night, in his historic address to the Republican National Convention, Senator Zell Miller spoke plainly and passionately of his ideological journey from FDR to W, articulating what so many of us think. After his speech, he called Chris Matthews to task for his boorish partisanship, articulating what so many of us think. Miller has no reason to apologize for his lack of finesse. This was a long overdue smackdown, not a meltdown.
Some conservative spinmeisters are already pronouncing Zell’s zingers too hot for the heartland. Hogwash! Frank Luntz’s MSNBC polling group of “undecided swing voters” (we’ll just have to take their word for it) overwhelmingly approved of Miller’s speech, citing his credibility as a Democrat and former Marine. Indeed, 11 out of 17 said Miller’s speech made them more inclined to vote for Bush-Cheney.
Sometimes I think my conservative brethren are like squeamish puritans, too much of the mind and not of the flesh. I value the service they provide in the factory of ideas, but the ideological war will be won or lost here on the ground, where Americans appreciate the simple, unpolished truth as an antidote to demagoguery from the left. That is one reason George W. Bush and Zell Miller appeal so compellingly to Republicans, Democrats and independents.
Zell Miller saw a momentous fork in the road and, as Yogi Berra would say, he took it, forever redefining the phrase lame duck Democrat. He deserves our thanks, not our ivory tower condescension.
In the event that Miller's preemptive strike against the liberal media sparks a grassroots movement, I have the slogan ready to roll: "We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it any more!"
Last night, in his historic address to the Republican National Convention, Senator Zell Miller spoke plainly and passionately of his ideological journey from FDR to W, articulating what so many of us think. After his speech, he called Chris Matthews to task for his boorish partisanship, articulating what so many of us think. Miller has no reason to apologize for his lack of finesse. This was a long overdue smackdown, not a meltdown.
Some conservative spinmeisters are already pronouncing Zell’s zingers too hot for the heartland. Hogwash! Frank Luntz’s MSNBC polling group of “undecided swing voters” (we’ll just have to take their word for it) overwhelmingly approved of Miller’s speech, citing his credibility as a Democrat and former Marine. Indeed, 11 out of 17 said Miller’s speech made them more inclined to vote for Bush-Cheney.
Sometimes I think my conservative brethren are like squeamish puritans, too much of the mind and not of the flesh. I value the service they provide in the factory of ideas, but the ideological war will be won or lost here on the ground, where Americans appreciate the simple, unpolished truth as an antidote to demagoguery from the left. That is one reason George W. Bush and Zell Miller appeal so compellingly to Republicans, Democrats and independents.
Zell Miller saw a momentous fork in the road and, as Yogi Berra would say, he took it, forever redefining the phrase lame duck Democrat. He deserves our thanks, not our ivory tower condescension.
In the event that Miller's preemptive strike against the liberal media sparks a grassroots movement, I have the slogan ready to roll: "We're mad as Zell and we're not going to take it any more!"
Saturday, August 28, 2004
Hen in the Fox House
Just days before the November 1992 election, the California Senate race was a tossup - - that is, until sleazy Democrat operative Bob Mulholland disrupted a campaign event for Republican candidate Bruce Herschensohn, announcing that Herschensohn visited a strip club. Never mind that Herschensohn, his lady, and their friends Ken Minyard, long-time Los Angeles radio personality, and his wife had gone there on a “double date.” The late hit effectively ended Herschensohn’s chances of winning.
As someone who proudly volunteered in both of Herschensohn’s Senate campaigns, I was disappointed, disheartened and disgusted that the reputation and ambitions of a fine man were casualties of the politics of personal destruction. Bruce Herschensohn was and is exactly the sort of rare, principled, dignified, thoughtful statesman we need in government at all levels. Mulholland got his hand mildly slapped by the California Democrat party and then promptly returned to his role as muck merchant in every successive presidential campaign, including Clinton’s 1998 impeachment battle and the Florida post-election ground war in 2000. Now he is polluting the blogosphere, too.
On election night 1992, Susan Estrich provided commentary for a Los Angeles TV station. As I recall clearly, she was a partisan Democrat who most definitely was not celebrating Barbara Boxer’s first Senate victory. In the strongest terms, Estrich defended Herschensohn and denounced Mulholland. This, I thought, was an independent, unscripted Democrat that I could respect.
Since then, Estrich became a national pundit and my appreciation for her has grown commensurately. She has been fair, frank and feisty in her opinions, often criticizing the Clintons for “sucking the oxygen” out of the party that she loves. She helped to coordinate a group of influential Democrats who supported the 2002 gubernatorial campaign of Richard Riordan, the former "moderate" Republican Mayor of Los Angeles. I was delighted when my favorite channel, Fox News, signed Estrich as a recurring contributor in time for the 2004 election.
I am not sure what her new job description requires, but Estrich now seems to be little more than a partisan shill for Kerry. When an opposing panelist cites a fact that reflects poorly on Kerry, Estrich says with a shrug, “Oh, that’s not true,” and then follows the familiar Kerry defense:
1. Make an accusation about a Republican/conservative.
2. Do not address accusations made by Republicans/conservatives.
3. Change the subject.
4. Repeat steps 1-3 more loudly as necessary.
To her credit, she is not as strident as her CNN and MSNBC counterparts. Then again, I never thought I would be comparing her to Chris Matthews, Paul Begala and Eleanor Clift. During today's broadcast of At Large with Geraldo Rivera, Estrich accused the Swift Boat Vets of the worst smear tactics she has ever witnessed, although they documented their claims exhaustively and held themselves accountable to the public by granting numerous print and television interviews. In part, they are responding to allegations made about them by Senator John Kerry and his biographer, Douglas Brinkley, neither of whom have been available to the general media since the Swift Boat controversy arose. Meanwhile, the New York Daily News reported that Democrats are employing Mulholland-style dirty tricks, compiling personal dossiers on Swift Boat Vets.
So I ask: The worst smear tactics ever? Really, Susan?
Whether she is taking marching orders from the DNC or FNC, Susan Estrich is contradicting her own record of more than a decade and I am sorry for the loss of a refreshingly honest voice on the other side.
As someone who proudly volunteered in both of Herschensohn’s Senate campaigns, I was disappointed, disheartened and disgusted that the reputation and ambitions of a fine man were casualties of the politics of personal destruction. Bruce Herschensohn was and is exactly the sort of rare, principled, dignified, thoughtful statesman we need in government at all levels. Mulholland got his hand mildly slapped by the California Democrat party and then promptly returned to his role as muck merchant in every successive presidential campaign, including Clinton’s 1998 impeachment battle and the Florida post-election ground war in 2000. Now he is polluting the blogosphere, too.
On election night 1992, Susan Estrich provided commentary for a Los Angeles TV station. As I recall clearly, she was a partisan Democrat who most definitely was not celebrating Barbara Boxer’s first Senate victory. In the strongest terms, Estrich defended Herschensohn and denounced Mulholland. This, I thought, was an independent, unscripted Democrat that I could respect.
Since then, Estrich became a national pundit and my appreciation for her has grown commensurately. She has been fair, frank and feisty in her opinions, often criticizing the Clintons for “sucking the oxygen” out of the party that she loves. She helped to coordinate a group of influential Democrats who supported the 2002 gubernatorial campaign of Richard Riordan, the former "moderate" Republican Mayor of Los Angeles. I was delighted when my favorite channel, Fox News, signed Estrich as a recurring contributor in time for the 2004 election.
I am not sure what her new job description requires, but Estrich now seems to be little more than a partisan shill for Kerry. When an opposing panelist cites a fact that reflects poorly on Kerry, Estrich says with a shrug, “Oh, that’s not true,” and then follows the familiar Kerry defense:
1. Make an accusation about a Republican/conservative.
2. Do not address accusations made by Republicans/conservatives.
3. Change the subject.
4. Repeat steps 1-3 more loudly as necessary.
To her credit, she is not as strident as her CNN and MSNBC counterparts. Then again, I never thought I would be comparing her to Chris Matthews, Paul Begala and Eleanor Clift. During today's broadcast of At Large with Geraldo Rivera, Estrich accused the Swift Boat Vets of the worst smear tactics she has ever witnessed, although they documented their claims exhaustively and held themselves accountable to the public by granting numerous print and television interviews. In part, they are responding to allegations made about them by Senator John Kerry and his biographer, Douglas Brinkley, neither of whom have been available to the general media since the Swift Boat controversy arose. Meanwhile, the New York Daily News reported that Democrats are employing Mulholland-style dirty tricks, compiling personal dossiers on Swift Boat Vets.
So I ask: The worst smear tactics ever? Really, Susan?
Whether she is taking marching orders from the DNC or FNC, Susan Estrich is contradicting her own record of more than a decade and I am sorry for the loss of a refreshingly honest voice on the other side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
