► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘MSNBC’

It’s time to fire Al Sharpton!

by Mojambo ( 103 Comments › )
Filed under Crime, Liberal Fascism, Media, Political Correctness, Politics at June 5th, 2013 - 3:00 pm

I think one of the most disgusting instances of political pandering was the way all the Democratic candidates for president in 2004 (including Joe Lieberman) pandered to Al Sharpton and not one of them had the guts or decency to bring up the Tawana Brawley or Freddie’s Fashion Mart incidents. By the way Mr. Radosh is wrong,  Joe Scarborough’s Show is losing viewers and he is not even a token “conservative” but at best a center-left pseudo Republican.

by Ron Radosh

Do you remember Tawana Brawley? If not, you must go and watch the video co-produced by RetroReport and the New York Times. The Times starts by giving us a wrap-up of the case:

The news reports at the time, in the late 1980s, were horrific. Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old African-American girl from New York State, was said to have been abducted and repeatedly raped by six white men. She was found with “KKK” written across her chest, a racial epithet on her stomach and her hair smeared with feces. She was so traumatized, according to reports, that at the hospital she answered yes-or-no questions by blinking her eyes. Making the crime even more vile, if that were possible, she and her lawyers later claimed that two of the rapists were law enforcement officials.

Enter a relatively unknown (at the time) African-American activist named Reverend Al Sharpton. Rushing to get in touch with young Tawana, Reverend Al became her mentor, spokesman, and leader of the mass protests demanding justice for Brawley, the victim of an apparent white racist attack. In the process, Sharpton accused the police officer — who Sharpton said had actually attacked her — along with the assistant district attorney who prosecuted the case, Steven Pagones. “The evidence,” Sharpton said, proved that “an assistant district attorney and a state trooper did this.” Sharpton led mass picket lines at New York state offices, which I recall at times included the always gullible folk singer Pete Seeger.

[………..] It was too late for Officer Harry Crist Jr., who committed suicide because of the false accusations made against him, or for Assistant DA Pagones, whose career was ruined and whose reputation was smeared.

Writing today at The Daily Beast, Stuart Stevens calls it a “shocking reminder of the toxic mix racial exploitation and personal ambition can produce.” It should be, he writes, “required viewing for the NBC News executives who are heavily invested in rehabilitating a key culprit of this loathsome episode: the Rev. Al Sharpton.” Stevens is correct, and let me put it more boldly: It is time for MSNBC and its parent, NBC News, to fire Rev. Al Sharpton.

R_s640x427

There was some justice for the family of the dead police officer and for the unjustly accused Pagones. The two lawyers working for Brawley, Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason — both radical New York leftists — had their law licenses revoked. But as we know, despite a long record of outrageous, racially charged actions carried out by Sharpton, which Stevens summarizes for us, the activist’s career began to skyrocket.

Sharpton became a media celebrity, a kingmaker of Democratic Party politics, and the man all candidates had to grovel before in order to get approval because he had succeeded in anointing himself as the self-proclaimed leader of America’s black community. Yet Sharpton continued to reveal his antisemitism, continued to make false charges on other issues, and, as Stevens puts it so well, he “spent decades vomiting hate, leaving innocent victims in his wake.” And as PJ Media readers well know, he has continued his role in the protests he organized at the time of the Trayvon Martin shooting. [……..]

Sharpton is not alone. But one thing stands out. Instead of suffering retribution for his continuing sins, he has been singularly rewarded. His greatest reward was NBC’s fairly recent appointment of Sharpton as anchor of his own program on MSNBC. He is also a regular commentator on other programs, including the network’s highly rated Morning Joe with Joe Scarborough. [………]Imagine the scandal if Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly took leadership of a conservative activist group while hosting their own TV talk programs. We know that all hell would break loose the very first day. Sharpton is being touted, as Stevens puts it, as a “credible source of information.”

That persona, as a result of this new 15 minute documentary, is now up to being challenged. In the documentary, when asked to comment about his role in the Brawley episode, Sharpton is clearly anything but apologetic. As Wayne Barrett, the former political writer at the old Village Voice with his friend the late Jack Newfield, says in the program, Sharpton still thinks he did nothing wrong. [………] Yet the media always come when Sharpton makes a call, as they did in Florida after the Martin shooting.

One other point must be made about Sharpton’s comments made for the documentary. First, he says, incredulously, that “something happened,” as he tries to imply that perhaps Brawley was right in her original charges. Second, he goes on to argue — and you must watch him say this in the video — that even if you think he is wrong, he acted because of his commitment “to social justice”!

Sharpton does not seem to realize it, but he is saying that “the end justifies the means,” the old apologia all leftist radicals use to explain away their most heinous acts. The holy grail of seeking “social justice” excuses anything, even false accusations that led to the suicide of one person and the end of a career for another. Beware of those who invoke social justice as the explanation for their actions.  [………]

Yes, MSNBC is an upfront leftist news organization. Joe Scarborough, who regularly is balanced by the usual assortment of leftists and liberals, is the rare exception — the token conservative hired because he once was in Congress and has ties to the Hill and many friends to call upon for interviews and as guests. The network last year took the step of firing Pat Buchanan, whose upfront paleoconservative views offended the network honchos, and whose latest book at the time was accused of racism.

Nothing Buchanan wrote or did, however, compared one iota with the offenses of Al Sharpton, which continue unabated to this day. It is time that NBC do what they did to Buchanan. It is time to fire Sharpton, for he has made clear in his unwarranted defense of his actions in the Brawley case that he has learned nothing, and that he is still a purveyor of inflammatory racial charges that undermine any remaining credibility needed for the position of a news network anchor.

[…….] Even an avowed leftist network has to be called to account when it crosses the line and tries to give a classic demagogue a position on its news staff.

Read the rest – Memo to NBC News” Time to fire Rev. Al Sharpton!

Liberalism is marginal, as is MSNBC’s audience

by Mojambo ( 103 Comments › )
Filed under Liberal Fascism, Media, Progressives at May 30th, 2013 - 8:00 pm

One of the Knish’s better  columns. It is funny how the media refuses to identify itself openly as “liberal” and when it does (see Newsweek and MSNBC) it fails.

by Daniel Greenfield

In 2010, Newsweek was sold for a dollar and it has been devalued since. Its corporate owners have called buying it a mistake and a fool’s errand. Around the same time last year, Newsweek marked a major milestone. The loss of 2.5 million readers in ten years. Since then it lost another million leaving it with about the reading population of a small city.

Meanwhile MSNBC isn’t doing any better. It lost a fifth of its viewers since last year and it still can’t decide if it’s a network of angry idiots screaming at the camera (Chris Matthews, Al Sharpton, Ed Schultz and Lawrence O’Donnell) or snide aging college kids making wisecracks about Republicans (Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes). Neither format is working all that well and at this rate MSNBC may want to look into bringing Keith Olbermann, who combines both demographics, back for another run.

Newsweek and MSNBC will both attribute their bleeding readership and viewership to the internet, but that doesn’t explain why they’re both doing badly there as well. MSNBC was caught hiring bots pretending to be young women to pump up hashtags for its hosts and Newsweek’s fusion with the Daily Beast didn’t save it either. [……]

Neither do Newsweek and MSNBC suffer from a surplus of class. Newsweek’s desperate covers last year amounted to a formerly respected magazine descending into outright trolling. It was no longer possible to tell the difference between Newsweek covers and Newsweek parody covers. [……….]On the MSNBC front, no news network which includes Al Sharpton trying to read from a teleprompter can be accused of betting on class.

MSNBC tried to be FOX News for liberals and Newsweek tried to be the Huffington Post with a print edition. They didn’t outright fail at the job, but they couldn’t succeed well enough either.

The dirty little secret of liberal media is that it doesn’t work

The dirty little secret of liberal media is that it doesn’t work. Outlets that identify explicitly as liberal usually play to a very marginal audience. Mother Jones begs money from its readers in the same obnoxious way as PBS. NPR relies on donors. The New Republic is flailing. Liberal mags that succeed do it by focusing on a topic that overlaps with a liberal target audience and embeds their articles there.

It works for magazines like Rolling Stone and the New Yorker. Online sites like Huffington Post and Buzzfeed succeed by filling themselves with so much trash that the politics becomes a sideline. The liberal brand is fine when it’s stuffed into culture, elitist or trashy. It doesn’t however stand on its own two feet. It can’t, because it has no real appeal.

Liberalism remains marginal. Gallup polls invariably show forty percent of Americans describing themselves as conservative and twenty percent or less identifying as liberal. Liberals dumped the liberal brand after conservatives effectively destroyed it back in the Reagan era. [……]

The cultural dominance of the left did not come about because a majority of Americans knowingly identify with it, but because the left has succeeded in breaking up its agendas into tinier and tinier pieces and making them part of the national dialogue using seemingly agnostic media channels. These stealth tactics have been successful because they eschewed open identification. Liberal media doesn’t work when it’s transparently liberal. That’s why even liberals mock NPR’s news coverage.

Liberal media influence works when it isn’t identified as such

Liberal media influence works when it isn’t identified as such. And when it is identified as such then eighty percent of the country switches the channel and cancels its subscription. And then liberals realize that they are preaching to the choir and dump the whole thing as a bad business. MSNBC’s overt identification with a liberal agenda allowed viewers to see how little of a difference there was between a liberal news channel and the “objective” mainstream news media.

MSNBC exposed millions of people to what actual media liberals sound like when they take off their disguises and begin talking about their agenda. [………..]

It’s the agenda that has always been the issue. What conservatives understand and most of the country does not, is that the issues being debated are not singular events. It’s not just about an individual tax hike or gay marriage or background checks for gun owners. It’s about a larger agenda being put into place piece by piece. And that agenda is the ultimate taboo topic.  […….]

Watch a media report on any issue and there is never any identification or agenda to the left. Liberal activists are just activists. Often they are described as mothers or grandmothers. They don’t have a larger plan. They would just like us to ban something dangerous, raise taxes, protect our oceans and make the country more equal. [……..]And most of the country accepts this deceptive coverage at face value.

MSNBC however churned out naked liberalism. It showed career radicals like Melissa Harris-Perry discoursing on just what the agenda is. And that’s fine for Mother Jones, but it isn’t something that liberals like to see out in the open. And it’s not something that even many of them want to spend too much time thinking about because understanding what they have truly climbed on board with can be a troubling and alienating experience.

Naked liberalism makes even liberals uncomfortable. It’s why they get uncomfortable hearing the self-righteous voices on NPR. It’s too much like looking into a mirror and the things in the mirror are surprisingly unsettling. Hearing a Keith Olbermann or Jon Stewart tear into Republicans was one thing. Opposition is always safe ground. It’s when the talk begins to turn to what you stand for that things begin to fall apart.

Newsweek and MSNBC had made the mistake of going “Full Liberal”

Newsweek and MSNBC had made the mistake of going “Full Liberal” and not only is there a much smaller liberal audience, but that audience doesn’t really like naked liberalism. It would rather see its agenda dressed up in mainstream colors than see it for what it really is.  […….]

Conservative media outlets exist as alternatives to a dishonestly liberal media establishment. But what can liberal media outlets exist as alternatives to? All they can do is speak openly about the agenda that their big brothers choose to pass off as mainstream activism and when you already control the dialogue, there’s not much of a percentage in sudden bouts of honesty.

The liberal agenda relies on manipulation and deception. It can sell quite well so long as no one knows what they’re buying. But label the product with the liberal brand and it stays on the shelves. […….] They talk politics without letting on that they’re talking about politics because that admission is the death knell of everything.

Liberalism’s disproportionate influence depends on not being identified for what it is. That is why it is so panicked by right wing talk show hosts, not because of their rhetoric, but because they identify a clear political struggle between two political agendas and categorize both sides.  [……..]

What media liberals fear most isn’t the right, it’s being exposed as the left. It’s not so much what FOX News says, as its very existence that is threatening, because once viewers become aware that FOX represents the right, then, even if they don’t agree with it, they have to come around to the conclusion that there is another side and that the media embodies that other side.

Liberalism is marginal, as is MSNBC’s audience. Media outlets like Newsweek and MSNBC that go full liberal die. And that lesson has terrible implications for liberal power as a whole.

Read the rest – Death of a Naked Liberal

MSNBC boss Phil Griffin thinks Chris Matthews is a ‘statesman’

by Mojambo ( 35 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Elections 2012, George W. Bush, Liberal Fascism, Media, Mitt Romney, Politics, Republican Party at December 30th, 2012 - 9:50 am

To me Chris Matthews is a raging alcoholic who I think has the potential to do something awful to himself on live TV. Matthews (and in fairness others too) represents every thing that is wrong with cable news these days. At times it reminds me of the old “interviews” that Vince McMahon used to do with “wrestlers” on the WWF shows.

by David Bauder

NEW YORK (AP) — To his boss, Chris Matthews has become a statesman. His critics probably have other words.

The veteran MSNBC host raised his profile as much as any member of the television commentariat during the presidential campaign. His 5 p.m. “Hardball” show has seen viewership jump by 24 percent this year from 2011, 17 percent for the rerun two hours later.

Matthews symbolized MSNBC’s growing comfort in being a liberal alternative to Fox News Channel. He engaged in an uncomfortable on-air confrontation with Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, seemed nearly apoplectic when President Barack Obama flubbed his first debate and had to apologize for appearing grateful that Hurricane Sandy might have helped Obama’s re-election effort.

With Keith Olbermann out of sight, Matthews essentially replaced him as the commentator that most annoyed conservative viewers.

“During the run-up to the Iraq War, he just became really, really partisan and became even more so when MSNBC decided to become the anti-Fox,” said Geoff Dickens, who used to watch Matthews as a fan and now monitors him regularly as part of his job with the conservative Media Research Center.

Matthews is not afraid to say what he thinks. He’s a former newspaper columnist and one-time aide to a 1980s era Democrat, House Speaker Tip O’Neill. He seriously considered running for the U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania a few years back, where he probably would have been asked repeatedly to explain why he voted for George W. Bush in 2000.

[…….]

“He’s as good as he’s ever been,” said Phil Griffin, MSNBC president. “He’s at a place in his life where he’s really comfortable in his own skin. He’s a statesman. He has so much knowledge and I think he understands it better. He’s always been great, but I really think he’s been at the peak of his game.”

Iraq turned Matthews against Bush. He said war and peace, and civil rights, are the issues that drive him most and explain his enthusiasm for Obama.

Matthews seemed personally offended by efforts in individual states to tighten voter registration and identification laws. Republicans called it an attempt to curb voter fraud; Matthews said it was to suppress voters friendly to Obama. He said Republicans would use welfare and other issues to subtly appeal to white voters still uncomfortable with a black president.

[……]

His repeated attention to the issue “irritates some people, because they can’t stand being called bigoted. It drives them crazy. And I agree, it would drive me crazy.”

The issue drove his confrontation with Prebius, which occurred on “Morning Joe” during the GOP convention. Matthews challenged Prebius about playing the “race card” during the campaign and for references to Obama’s birth certificate. It devolved into a schoolyard insult match.

[……]

Prebius later called Matthews “the biggest jerk in the room.” Matthews doesn’t seem to have any regrets.

“I’d been talking like that for awhile,” he said. “He didn’t like it. I didn’t expect he would. I felt that I had in my presence the guy who represented the party and it was an opportunity I shouldn’t let pass. It’s one of those moments in the campaign that’s going to have endurance.”

The one quote Republican critics repeatedly throw back at Matthews is when he reacted to an Obama speech in 2008 by saying “I felt this thrill going up my leg.”

Matthews points out that he said something similar in 2004, after Obama addressed the Democratic national convention. Its frequent citation annoys Matthews, who knows it will never leave him, but probably also because he thinks people miss the point. He was speaking more about what Obama represented — a black man seeking the highest office in a land with a troubled racial history — than Obama himself.

It hasn’t exempted himself from some high-level teasing, like when Obama appeared at the campaign’s Al Smith dinner after the president’s disastrous first debate.

“I particularly want to apologize to Chris Matthews,” Obama said. “Four years ago I gave him a thrill up his leg. This time around, I gave him a stroke.”

Matthews said “Hardball” has gotten a sharper focus. The editorial opinion has moved to the front of the show. Saying what he thinks isn’t hard; Matthews’ flirtation with running for the Senate ended in part because the need to adhere to party orthodoxy wouldn’t mix with a man comfortable with voicing a dozen opinions per minute.

[…….]

Like most in his trade, Matthews seems a little lost with the end of a long campaign. He’s done a few speculative 2016 stories, not recognizing the subject is enough to send most people screaming from the room.

Every day is one day closer to another election, though.

“He is sort of the model figure for who we are,” Griffin said. “He doesn’t stick out loving politics and being passionate about politics. It comes across in everything we do … And that’s Chris.”

Read the rest – Matthews raises profile during campaign

Chris Matthews has had a Charles Johnson style nervous breakdown

by Daedalus ( 190 Comments › )
Filed under Blogwars, Cult of Obama, Humor, LGF, Progressives at October 24th, 2012 - 8:00 pm

Many of us over the Diary of Daedalus have come to the conclusion that Speranza’s analysis of Charles Johnson is correct, the Corpulent Creep has had a nervous breakdown as  he went from being a rational blogger, to a deranged Obama supporter. Charles calls any opposition to Obama racist, well Chuck is not alone in his Obama worship derangement.

There once was a time when Chris Matthews was a credible journalist as he tended to be a Moderate-Liberal and was no great fan of Bill Clinton. He even hosted the Rush Limbaugh show a few times back in the 90’s, but sometime during the Bush Administration (around the time of the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003) , Matthews had a nervous breakdown.  He then he latched onto Obama and declared him to be God and the perfect man,  and now he lashes out Charles Johnson style at any critic of Obama as a racist.

Chris Matthews is a man who is not functioning fully with a mental capacity. He now claims that had he run for The Democratic nomination for Senator in Pennsylvania, that he would have won. Even worse, Matthews claims he would be a star for the Democrats.

Election years brings larger challenges, starting with the party conventions, and then the long campaign. Matthews was enthusiastic about Barack Obama in 2008, but now he is disappointed. “I vote for heroes,” he says. “Obama’s strengths were apparent; his weaknesses weren’t. We saw someone who was very brilliant, but what we didn’t see was someone who didn’t have the necessary skills as a backroom deal maker.”

This time around, he thinks it will be close. A lot depends on three factors, he says, such as “how Romney performs during and after the debates—does he come across as a human being? If he does, look out, Obama. Then, [the subject of] unemployment—if it goes up again above 8.5 percent in October. Put them together, with the huge amount of spending that the Republicans can use to trumpet any triumphs in those two areas in the last week or so— the money they have now that they could never spend before—just trumpeting the latest bad economic news, pounding it home to people. Don’t tell me that’s not going to have an impact.”

As for his own political ambitions, he says that dream is over. “I know this: If I had run and won and beaten [Senator Pat] Toomey,  I would be one of the Democrats people talk about today,” Matthews says. “I’m not dreaming here. I would be one of the stars of the Democratic Party—there aren’t that many. My agenda now is to do what I’m doing, which… if you’ll notice, I like.”

Chris Matthews has gone down the path of Charles Johnson and Andrew Sullivan.  He has lost the credibility he once had and has become something of a joke with his comment about getting a “thrill up my leg” after an Obama speech.  Both men worship Obama as a political/cultural deity who does no wrong.  If Romney wins on November 6th, I would put these two  on a suicide watch.