Chuck Todd and the Rosetta Stone of Liberal Bias

Posted: December 29, 2014 in Featured, Media Bias
Tags: , ,

CHUCK TODDChuck Todd, who hosts Meet the Press on NBC, opened his show the way he often does, by introducing his panel of journalists. There was Luke Russert of NBC News, and Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report, and there was “Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post … and Ken Blackwell, conservative columnist and former Ohio Secretary of State.”

Did you catch it? Eugene Robinson isn’t the liberal columnist of the Washington Post. He’s simply Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post. But Ken Blackwell is identified as a “conservative columnist.”

This may strike members of the so-called mainstream media as one of those “what’s the big deal?” issues — even though it happens all the time both on TV and in print. But if  they’re feeling generous and concede that maybe it is somehow, some way, some kind of offense, it’s a misdemeanor of the lowest order. Journalistic jaywalking — at worst.

Sorry, but it is a big deal. A very big deal. One that goes straight to the heart of bias in the media.

Liberals, you see, don’t have to be identified. Liberals, as far as liberal journalists like Chuck Todd are concerned, aren’t controversial. They’re middle of the road. Moderate. Mainstream. Not so with conservatives. They need a warning label.

They put warning labels on packs of cigarettes and pesticides because they can be dangerous to your health. And, as far as many liberals – both in and out of the media — are concerned, conservatives need warning labels because their ideas can be dangerous to your health. I mean, if liberal views are middle of the road, moderate and mainstream, conservative views, being the opposite, must be fringe. And fringe ideas, in the liberal worldview, are most likely racist, homophobic and misogynist ideas, which are … well … dangerous!

So this little tidbit that Chuck Todd unknowingly offered up at the beginning of his program is the Rosetta Stone. It tells us not only how liberal journalists view conservatives, but it also tells us a lot about how liberal journalists see just about everything from politics to all the hot button social issues of the day.

It may be asking too much for Chuck to understand any of this. After all, he’s a bias denier. (I use that word “denier” because that’s the word liberals like to throw at anyone who doesn’t see global warming the same way Al Gore sees it. Liberals don’t own the word, right? )

Chuck has acknowledged a “cultural bias” in the news, but says it’s not because journalists slant the news left to coincide with their liberal politics. Rather, he says, it stems from “the fact that the news media is headquartered in New York City.”

So it’s geographical bias, according to Chuck Todd – not political bias. It’s a New York City bias. And what kind of bias would we find in New York City? Yes, exactly!

If the national news media were headquartered, say, in Tupelo, Mississippi – and almost all the journalists were conservatives instead of liberal as they are now – do you think Chuck would write off bias simply as a geographical issue? Me neither. He’d be yelling conservative bias from the roof of the NBC Building in Rockefeller Center.

No, Chuck Todd’s decision to put a warning label on the conservative columnist but not on the liberal was not an offense worthy of waterboarding. But it wasn’t journalistic jay walking either. It told us a lot about why liberal journalists put warning labels on conservatives. It told us that conservative views, which are held by millions and millions and millions of Americans, are subversive views, because they are not reasonable or mainstream or moderate. And if you don’t believe me, just ask Chuck.

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • Charles Nickalopoulis

    I don’t think I have ever watched him, but it sounds like I haven’t missed much.

  • phillama

    chuck todd is a waste, his show is unwatchable I watched five minutes of and then had visions of pissing in his mouth and all over his prissy beard and baldy head and then watchin that dummbitch in the red glasses lick the piss out of his beard

  • A.Alexander

    Wellfare state creates myths needed for it`s existance: the liberal ones.They are adopted by the wellfare state majority, who thinks permanently about 1% of the population.

  • Jimbo

    Most people don’t understand the difference between opinion and news….

    News – 7 people were killed by the hurricane

    Opinion – 7 people were killed because Republicans didn’t vote enough welfare funds to pay for water pumps.

    If you want news, go to Fox News. If you want propaganda, go to MSNBC.

  • buckrodgers

    How many times have you seen a white liberal, who didn’t think twice when he used his white skin when he applied for his job, run around the country, labeling everybody but himself a bigot, or how many times have you seen a liberal preach about global warming from the back of hIs gas guzzling SUV, since the early days of the Vietnam War, liberals have declared themselves, the conscious of America and self-appointed saviors and protectors of minorities, they were educated at prestigious university, by left wing radicals, who were on the FBI ten most wanted list, earning six figure salaries and everything America has to offer, sounds familiar, well it should because it’s always about them, their good and everybody else is bad, they earned to right to live their personal lives like a Louisiana Klansmen because they care, in fact, their legends in their own minds, who never practice what they preach. their motto is do what I sat not as I do.

    • Jimbo

      Good post! So true….

  • nkqx57a

    It’s not about labels; it’s about creating stigmas for
    those labels. Liberals fail to understand the stigmas associated with their
    progressive liberalism; because if they did wouldn’t they want to change those
    negative stigmas.

  • FlamingFloridian

    Not many watch that show anymore!! Wonder why???!!!hahahaha

  • Chad G. Singer

    It should be illegal for Journalists to label anyone on the air or in print. It’s those who are being labeled who chose the groups they’re affiliated with, not the journalists. Let those speaking label themselves if they want.

  • Stop Obamunism Now

    Chucky-Baby just feels the same way as his pal, Barack Obama…
    Conservative Republicans, especially TEA Party types are more dangerous to life on Earth than Muslim Militants bent on global Jihad!! It’s positively frightening!

  • Flowers2Paris

    Render happy moments to your loved ones with some awesome collection of flowers that wonderfully paves a way for you. Order Online
    Indonesia Florist     which is especially for him/her.

  • Lmaskell

    Blackwell is a POLITICIAN

  • Bob

    I’m shocked! Liberals are experts at identifying bias and hate. Prima facie evidence is treating a person “differently.” This one should be easy to spot.

  • RoscoeBonifitucci

    Libtards are Hypocrites. Pure and simple. They Lie, Cheat, Deceive and promote a Socialists Agenda without any conscious for the American People.

    • Marlon

      Do they also take the last donut and desecrate Mother’s Day? Are you a fan of small government? The world’s largest employer is DOD. Let’s do away with it. Then we will have smaller government.

      • allen goldberg

        Spoken like a true LIBTARD

        • Marlon

          I own a business. I hire people. My political beliefs place me very much in the center in many ways. Name calling is something I grew out of in grade school. It adds nothing but ignorance to discussions. Chuck Todd refers to a conservative commentator as a conservative and this is evidence of a clear liberal bias? Meet The Press is an NBC show. NBC used to be owned by those crazy bongo playing liberal hippies over at GE. Now it’s owned by those unbathed free love Socialists over at Comcast. Yep. You convinced me. The media is controlled by wild haired hippie freaks who want nothing more than a Socialist takeover of whatever is left of America the Brave. Chuck Todd is just the tip of a hippie iceberg. You better arm yourself and head to the bunker.

          • Keith Jones

            It’s the liberal assignment-editors, producers and reporters that run the day-to-day news operations. Don’t try to pretend that you don’t know that.

          • John Sposato

            Marlon, I get your reaction to the name-calling. I feel the same way. But your comments above add nothing to the discussion. Are you truly saying you don’t get what Goldberg is saying above? His article is not the sum and substance of conservative arguments about liberal bias in the media. Read the voluminous material he’s written on the subject to understand many of the reasons why he and we accuse the media of bias. And he writes from the prospective of someone who was an insider in the very institutions he is now critiquing, which gives him a bit of credibility and standing on the subject, don’t you think? But he is absolutely right about the fact that only conservative commentators are labeled as such in the MSM. Liberals are never labeled as such. Why do you suppose that is? This isn’t their worst sin of bias, but it is an important signpost.

            And you can say that your political beliefs place you “very much in the center in many ways.” How are we supposed to know that? Perhaps you are pro-choice and believe that places you in the center. Perhaps you believe that government is the natural solution to all of our problems and that places you in the center. I don’t know what you believe, and I’m not willing to automatically accept your assertion that you are a centrist. It doesn’t matter, because it doesn’t prove or disprove anything. It’s irrelevant.

          • Marlon

            My initial reaction to the article was that the example cited made for weak evidence of an overall liberal bias in the media. I wondered if any commenters would question the article’s assertions. What I found was a bunch of silly name calling and talk about when liberals are confronted with their idiocy they stammer and quake with fear and how Chicago is a Socialist wasteland. So my comment was in reaction to the name calling, which adds nothing to the discussion, in my opinion. This gets me called a LIBTARD, which I guess means I’m liberal and retarded and maybe I can’t tie my own shoes and need help direct dialing, I don’t know. So, I offer that I’m really rather a centrist and not a far left loonie. But I guess anyone is not a full throated Conservative who feels Socialists are ransacking the Treasury is suspect. My personal politics may be wholly irrelevant, but so is calling someone a LIBTARD as if that seals the deal. So, yeah, I give up; Allen Goldberg called me out. I’m the love child of Jane Fonda and George Soros. I was raised on Saul Alinsky and Karl Marx. I live in the Socialist Utopia of Chicago, where both Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright live. I once stood in Eugene Debs back yard, and I know all the words to “Union Maid”. I once voted for Dukakis! That’s how indoctrinated I am.

          • John Sposato

            Agreed, Marlon. And if I had a chance to rewrite my original comment after more thought, I would have come down much harder on the moronic name-calling. I don’t comment often, and I try to read comments even less often. They upset me greatly. The stupid name calling and ridiculous lack of respect from both sides is appalling. To that extent at least, and perhaps more, I’m with you. God bless.

          • Jake Huff

            I have enjoyed the back and forth between John and Marlon. In fact, reading your comments has restored my faith that people really can reason with one another, though their differences may be quite pronounced. Open discussion without the name calling is what this nation needs. When we believe that we are “right” so strongly that we cannot see another point of view at all, that leaves us closed off from ever growing in knowledge and truth. As human beings, we learn line upon line, precept upon precept. Einstein didn’t start out as a genius: he had to explore and learn from his experiences, which then led him to the great discoveries which laid the foundation for further learning and discovery. None of us know everything, not even Bernie. But, as we talk with one another, and allow that our beliefs may be false from time to time, we can advance as a people and as a nation. We can learn from each other and be a better nation. So, thank you John and Marlon for a very enlightening conversation and an amicable conclusion.

          • recovering rugger

            Finally a discussion that wasn’t taken over by those bent on self serving rants and name calling. Kudos gentlemen.

          • Jeff Webb

            Whether or not Bernie meant for the Todd example to represent ALL the proof needed to show liberal slant, it certainly is one of many, Marlon.

            I believe it was in “Bias” (Bernie’s first book) where he first pointed out this practice. The chapter was “Identity Politics” and the guilty party was Peter Jennings.

      • Drew Page

        The world’s largest employer is the U.S. federal government. Yes, I would like to see a smaller government, there isn’t a single federal agency or Department that couldn’t stand a 10% reduction to its workforce.

      • Jimbo

        Worse than desecrating Mother’s Day, they murder babies, steal our health care, rob from hard working people to give to bums, and punish honest people while rewarding dishonest people.

  • WillieDD

    Thanks Bernie, you’ve confirmed what I was seeing and hearing for some time now from the Liberal media. These liberals have gone so far south on how they present themselves and how they treat conservatives, I find them as very dangerous more and more everyday to our way of life and to our country.

  • David Nelson

    Not to mention, in addition to all the incidents cited so far, the tendency of the press to label hard-line, radical Muslims conservative, Putin conservative, the ruling Chinese communists conservative, insane genocidal dictators conservative, and in general, anything negative and repellent conservative. Their view of reality is so warped that they actually see honorable American citizens, who see through their narcissistic tantrums and call them on it, as heirs to the Mussolinis and Hitlers of the world.

    • Drew Page

      Freedom of the press is guaranteed…to anyone who owns one.

      Those who would like to see honest and unbiased reporting should invest in their own media outlets.

      • allen goldberg

        Slight issue you are ignoring
        Owning a press outlet comes with government benediction

        Not everyone qualifies…like conservatives

        • Drew Page

          I stand corrected.

    • allen goldberg

      Thank you David…you are paying attention!!!

    • John Sposato

      I’m with you, David, but I give the media a pass when they refer to those foreign political segments as conservative. I believe a case can be made that the word is appropriate in the sense that it means “conserving what is” rather that destroying it to create a new order of things. That said, there is NO question about the liberal bias in the American mainstream media. Anyone who can’t see that…well, what’s that song lyric? “There are none so blind as he who will not see.”

    • Bob Hadley

      I’m unaware of radical Muslim, Putin, ruling Chinese communists or genocidal dictators being labeled by the media as conservative. It sounds like you have a persecution complex.

      • David Nelson

        You probably haven’t been reading the local daily paper around here — lucky you.

        • Bob Hadley

          Where’s “here”? Please cite the newspaper that’s done this.

  • purplecandles

    The same thing is happening regarding the toddler shooting his mother in the WalMart in Idaho. The AP story refers to the town as “politically conservative.” I don’t recall seeing Chicago labeled ultra left-wing socialist when their unending murders are tallied up after every week-end.

    • Josh

      I’m surprised Chicago would be labeled as anything. Its very existence is the type of “inconvenient truth” that liberals run away from — metaphorically and literally. You won’t see many ground-and-pound campaigns from white liberals in Chicago.

      The worst parts of Chicago, like the worst parts of cities everywhere across America, reveal something else that most liberal Americans are scared of: Their empowerment initiatives for single mothers are failing at massive rates. I know people love to cite that “72% of AA children born out of wedlock statistic,” but let’s be clear: That statistic is unequivocally false.

      72% is the aggregate. This means it takes into account black men and women who are actually married in the suburbs or middle class communities or outside of inner cities. Inside of these cesspits of pure despair, the rates are closer to 90%.

      If Chicago is to be labeled anything, I say it should be labeled for expiration. Paint that f’n thing with the target and bomb it already.

      • Drew Page

        These “inner city” areas all ride the same merry-go-round of ignorance, fatherless children born out of wedlock, unemployment, poverty, despair and high crime rates. Each of these conditions exacerbates the next, and results in generations that will follow the same pattern.

        Those caught up in this self-destructive cycle represent a relatively large voting bloc and are often pandered to by politicians and “leaders” who will tell these people their problems are someone else’s fault and their condition is the result of others trying to “keep them down”, those “others” being rich white people, i.e., Republicans.

        • Josh

          Well, another thing these communities have is, by and large, the benefit of being almost entirely black. Some cities, like Detroit, DC and East St Louis, are so black in makeup that the police, lawyers, judges and politicians are even black.

          They make great case studies to show that white privilege and white oppression are really just popular myths, like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster. Because blacks there do worse than anywhere else in the world, and white people’s influence is about as far as polio. But, no, you still can’t talk about this, and if you do manage to sneak it in, it will still be white society’s fault somehow, as people contort in an effort to say that we’ve simply abandoned these places — not that they’re examples of black-owned and operated cultures. +

          • Drew Page

            You make an excellent point. If it is “white people” and “white society” keeping blacks down, wouldn’t it seem that once white people and white society abandoned an area, that these areas would turn into paradise? Detroit, D.C., Newark, Cleveland and Gary should be testimonies to what blacks can do, once out from under the heel of white people. And they are.

          • Josh

            There are historically a couple of solid ways a separate culture can benefit from wealth like the existing majority culture:

            – Offer something of worth; e.g. innovate and invent!
            – Assimilate and play ball to the existing standards

            We see none of this with the poorest cultures in America (and that goes for any “race” per se). We see a refusal to play ball like the rest of society, and we see people with absolutely nothing to sell or barter. Yet the existing culture is expected to simultaneously lower its standards while lifting the other culture up. Not doing such is called “institutional racism.”

            If the Jews can do it, anyone can do it. Nobody in the history of the world has had more obstacles. IMO, the biggest issue within the poorest black precincts today is that their loudest advocates expect a king’s ransom to be paid out to appease victimhood, whereas other cultures just work their way out of poverty.

          • Drew Page

            Jews did it and Asians are doing it. What were the common factors in their success? In my opinion it was the belief in, and adherence to, strong family values. Examples and expectations were set for children by two parents and education and hard work were stressed. For the most part, people in those communities helped each other and didn’t prey upon each other.

            When Jackie Robinson broke into MLB, he had to overcome huge racial prejudice, attacks and discrimination. MLB did not widen the strike zone for Jackie, or establish a more lenient set of rules for him. He had to meet the same standards as other ball players. Actually, Jackie set higher standards for himself; he met and exceeded those standards. The same can be said for other blacks who achieved personal success. “White privilege” didn’t stop them and racism didn’t stop them. Blacks who had talent, determination and who were willing to work hard and learn have achieved success in every field.

            Why, do you suppose, Sharpton and Obama aren’t talking to the black community about these successes, and what led to them? Why do you suppose they are not telling the black community that dropping out of school and young girls having babies out of wedlock are the surest ways to ensure they and their children will remain poor and that poverty drives crime, jail and death for their young men?

    • http://theromancatholicvote.com/ catholicvoter

      Excellent point!

  • rational38

    Or maybe is is responding to the criticism (false) that too few conservatives appear on the MSM and labeling to guests to rebut the false charge. Or maybe it was a rare slip. Or maybe Gene is a moderate (he is). Or maybe the guest self-identifies as a conservative and wanted that.

    • allen goldberg

      Or MAYBE..and I know it just could not be that the world of journalism is so damned biased, all tilted toward liberalism, that having ONE conservative validates their mantra of fair and balanced..which unlike Fox News [which actually is fair and balanced]..they know exactly what they are doing..

      • rational38

        Do you really buy the FOX line or do they pay you handsomely. I am hoping the latter.

        • allen goldberg

          I watch all seven news channels and compare their treatment of stories, and what they decide to report or OMIT…Just look for example at the murder of an Ambassador, first time in 30 years.

          There is no comparison…and you might think Fox is biased…but in direct regular comparison to ABC , NBC, MSNBC CNN, CBS, BBC and international networks..the bias is real and unmistakable. It is liberal pablum. 24/7. Fox exceeds their mission while the others are slanted and biased over 90% of the time….

          • rational38

            That tin hat pinching? If anything the major networks, all owned by multinational companies, have a conservative bias on economic issues. You are confusing rationality on social issues with bias.

          • allen goldberg

            Cannot disagree more. And I am not confusing rationality with social issues. News Networks are mission-ed to report the news, not provide a editorial flavor on every story. They are part of the Democratic propaganda machine and have been for years. Extract your head from your backside.

          • rational38

            You just sound nuts??? Why would organizations controlled and owned by wealthy plutocrats have a liberal bias unless you are confusing sanity for liberalism which appears to be the case.

  • Seven

    Some on the conservative side do the same. While watching Fox and Friends this morning, the uproar was all about the latest revealed comments made by economist Johnathan Gruber, and how they were upset that Gruber was in someway questioning the intelligence of average citizens. But, in the next breath we were told to stay tuned to the next block, because their pal Jesse Waters was going to show us just how little the average citizen on the street know about President Lincoln.

  • Daiv64118

    The scary thing about liberals, and it took me along time to learn it is they really do see conservatives as subversive and dangerous. They feel their whole world view is threatened when we disagree with them. I’ve seen panic set in on their face, I’ve seen them stutter and shake when they thought their liberal orthodoxy is challenged. They view conservative thought not as a simple disagreement between friends but as a sickness that must be stamped out and as a group, conservatives are to be sent to the back of the virtual bus and are to be more feared than the Taliban. How do you converse and reason with people that are so unreasonable? Its disheartening.

    • W.A. Jones

      It’s only disheartening because they don’t have the guns. Give them guns and cattle cars and it’s worse than disheartening.

    • rational38

      I am fairly sure you are describing conservatives who tend to be much less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement than liberals. Just look at a typical comment section to see the ad hominem, racist, anti-gay, anti-women vitriol that is regularly spread. Your post seems sincere and this always should be a discussion among friend who seek a better nation through politics In that spirit, I hope you have a wonderful and prosperous New Year.

      • susan

        Please tell me you are not taking the content of most comment boards as representative of anything. You do understand the concept of trolling, correct? If not, Google it. Rule of thumb, at least half of internet comment boards posts are written by trolls. So they are in no way representative of anyone’s true beliefs, on either side of the political spectrum.

        Don’t be taken in so easily by everything you read.

      • Jeff Webb

        I’m not aware of any studies conducted on online comment sections, but that’s not probably not the best standard by which one should measure party incivility, r38. Think about the # of websites where people can post comments, even the sites where it seems odd to have such a section; the sheer number of posters; the fact that one person can post in hundreds of forums under any number of pseudonyms; the fact that some of the worst vitriol comes from people pretending to represent the other side.

        In “100 People who are Screwing up America,” Bernie used a far better metric. He pointed to the people with the most visibility, power, and/or influence in our society, like celebrities, journalists, and pols to name a few.

        Incidentally, as far as people who “tend to be much less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement” are concerned, you’ll have a hard time finding anyone who fits that description as well as Barack Obama.

        • Bob Hadley

          “Incidentally, as far as people who “tend to be much less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement” are concerned, you’ll have a hard time finding anyone who fits that description as well as Barack Obama.”
          Give some examples where Pres. Obama has been less than those you could readily cite.
          Pres. Obama has been called, among other things, a communist, socialist, Stalinist dictator, stupid, clueless, secret Muslim (altho’ not in itself pejorative, used to show nefarious deceit on his part), a terrorist sympathizer and a liar.

          • Tim Ned

            “has been called, among other things, a communist, socialist, Stalinist dictator, stupid, clueless, secret Muslim (altho’ not in itself pejorative, used to show nefarious deceit on his part), a terrorist sympathizer and a liar.”

            I believe you are talking about GW Bush? Certainly by the so called MSM, GWB had a much – much more difficult time than Obama.

            If you outside of the main stream news and cable, yup Obama is taking those words but so did GWB.

            As far as Obama, I believe his total disconnect, refusal to communicate or negotiate with the Republican congress is a great example of:

            “Incidentally, as far as people who “tend to be much less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement” are concerned, you’ll have a hard time finding anyone who fits that description as well as Barack Obama.”

          • Bob Hadley

            That Pres. GW Bush was subjected to abuse has nothing to do with the point I made above. (Even if it does, as O’Reilly likes to say, bad behavior doesn’t justify bad behavior.) The point is that Pres Obama has been subjected to rampant incivility and Jeff Webb claims that you’d have a hard time finding someone who is more uncivil than Pres. Obama. I was asking for examples of his incivility. Try to stay on-topic.
            Your example is grossly misinformed, even fantastic. Pres. Obama and his administration have met with the Rep. Congress on numerous occasions. The most recent was when the Rep. Congressional leadership reached a budget deal with Pres. Obama and, together, resisted the extremes in both wings of Congress.
            You want to talk about incivility, nay destructiveness? While Barrack Obama was being inaugurated in 2009 Congressional leaders met to commiserate over losing the White House. Then they started discussing ways to bring him down. They made a pact to fight him at every turn while giving lip service to bipartisanship. They concluded (largely correctly as it turned out) that Pres. Obama would be blamed for the lack of progress

          • Jeff Webb

            >>Give some examples where Pres. Obama has been less than those you could readily cite<>Pres. Obama has been called, among other things, a communist, socialist, Stalinist dictator, stupid, clueless, secret Muslim (altho’ not in itself pejorative, used to show nefarious deceit on his part), a terrorist sympathizer and a liar.<<

            So? Does that excuse Obama from being less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement? Does that somehow mean he isn't?

          • Bob Hadley

            You made a statement that you would have a hard time finding anyone who is less civil than Pres. Obama. I asked you for examples of Pres. Obama’s incivility.
            I’ll you again to cite some examples so I can see what you’re talking about.
            Since you made the statement, use your own definition of incivility. Use your own criteria for the examples – whatever that means.

          • Jeff Webb

            >>You made a statement that you would have a hard time finding anyone who is less civil than Pres. Obama<>Since you made the statement, use your own definition of incivility. Use your own criteria for the examples<<

            Again, it's "less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement." and since you consider yourself more objective than I am, we'll go by your standard here. It'll be a nice challenge for me, and a better & quicker way to help you see what I'm talking about.

          • Bob Hadley

            OK, cite examples (at least one) of where you’d have a hard time finding anyone who’s less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement than Pres. Obama. I’m particularly interested in the part of Pres. Obama being less civil in response to disagreement that anyone you can think of. If you want to also give examples of Pres. Obama being thin-skinned, go for it. If your examples are of Pres. Obama being uncivil and thin-skinned at the same time, then so be it.

          • Jeff Webb

            You got it, Bob. Just let me know what sorts of things qualify. If it’s easier for you, just tell me something a Republican pol did or said about Obama, so I’ll know your metric.

          • Bob Hadley

            If you don’t want to say what you meant by “less civil,” let’s just use a dictionary definition of civil: “adhering to the norms of polite social intercourse; not deficient in common courtesy.”
            OK, now give some examples to back-up your serious accusation, referenced above.

          • Jeff Webb

            Fine, Bob.

            #1, a simple petty swipe:“But I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess. I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking.”

            #2, accusing the GOP of opposing him out of sheer spite, not policy: “They don’t do anything! Except block me! And, and, and call me names. And it can’t be that much fun. It’d be so much more fun if they said ‘you know what, let’s do something together’. If they were more interested in growing the economy for you, and the issues that you’re talking about, instead of trying to mess with me, then we’d be doing a lot better.”

            #s 3 and 4, falsely characterizing their opposition to OC as simply an effort to deny people medical care: “Why it is my friends in the other party have made it their mission to prevent these people from getting healthcare?”

            #4: “The idea that you would shut down the government unless 30 million people don’t get healthcare is a bad idea…Again, they used to say they
            had a replacement, but they never actually arrived.”

          • Bob Hadley

            Is that the best you can do?????????? No wonder you kept stalling and trying to move the goal posts!

            Just admit it, you made a misstatement. Show some integrity. Even if the statements you cite above are uncivil, they’re nothing compared to the hate spewed at Pres. Obama. You said that you’d have a hard time finding anyone who is less civil (and more sensitive) in response to disagreement than Pres. Obama. Well, I found one (among the virtually countless):

            Whoever crafted the following petty snipes makes the quotes cited above seem like complements:

            “Lois Lerner will go to a plastic surgeon to have that
            God-awful face removed from the front of her head, and refer Debbie Wasserman Schulz. “

            “Gwyneth Paltrow will only speak if a smart person gives her a script or some brain cells. “

            “John Boehner will check into a hospital and have a surgeon install a spine and a pair of testicles. (And just to play it safe, voters in Ohio’s 8th congressional district will resolve in 2016 to stop huffing lacquer thinner before going to the polls.) “

            “As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two
            is Carney wasn’t the town again-slut Earnest is, and had a shorter visit with puberty.”
            You appear to think any severe criticism that you disagree with is uncivil, my thin-skinned one. You also seem to think that any petty personal attacks are civil as long as they are against those you disagree with.
            As for quote #1: Pres. Obama was not taking a petty swipe. He was speaking metaphorically to say that the GOP Congress was being obstructionist while he was trying to get the nation out of the economic ditch. Whether you agree with that is not relevant. He was making a serious point.
            As for quote # 2: Here again, he was making a serious point for which there is ample evidence. The GOP in Congress were trying to block him at every step. He was urging them to work with him in a give-and-take manner instead of giving the same general GOP rhetoric. Here again, whether you agree with this or not, he was making a serious point.
            as for quote #3: This is the closest of your examples to incivility. But it still pales in comparison to the hate spewed at pres. Obama. He has been accused of purposely trying to destroy our economy. If you want to find someone less civil and more sensitive in the face of disagreement, then find yourself (you do live in California? J/k)
            As for quote #4: If you read this quote carefully, you’ll see that Pres. Obama was talking about the net effect of what certain of those in the GOP wanted to break the standoff that resulted in the gov. shutdown. Here again, whether you agree with this is not relevant here. What is relevant is that Pres. Obama was making a serious point.

          • Jeff Webb

            Bob, you’re the who stalled and moved the goalposts, and YOU KNOW IT.
            I’m not surprised you didn’t want to name your criteria; then you wouldn’t be able to explain away Obama’s statements, could you?

            I’d suggest you just admit your definition of incivility depends on who’s on the receiving end, but that would require someone who’s intellectually honest.

            Thanks for citing my statements as an example, which it turns out are not uncivil if explained the same way you did Obama, oddly enough:

            #1: I was merely facetiously observing those two women, whatever their overall qualities, do not fit the current standard of physical attractiveness. If you think they do, you’re in the minority, to be honest.

            #2: I was pointing out that Paltrow has made statements that made her look not particularly bright, again facetiously.

            #3: Agree or not, Boehner often shows he doesn’t have the courage of his convictions, and it’s odd that he continues to be reelected in light of that.

            #4: You’re kidding, right?

            Look, next time you’re asked to name your criteria, please save us all some time and just do it, mmkay?

          • Bob Hadley

            You remarks were of a personal nature, the political issues were clearly secondary at most. Pres. Obama was attacking his opponents on the political issues. Calling people ugly, calling someone stupid, calling someone spineless and insinuating that a slice of the electorate is mentally incompetent (high on a poisonous substance) is not part of civil discourse. All this, because you disagree with them. It’s unnecessary and it’s uncivil. You can play all the games with words that you want, but the truth is that you’re either dishonest or truly clueless or both.

          • Jeff Webb

            >>You remarks were of a personal nature, the political issues were clearly secondary at most. Pres. Obama was attacking his opponents on the political issues.<<

            First, the fact you just admitted he attacked them is a sign of progress–kudos.
            Second, I'm a columnist with a modest (if that) readership. Obama OTOH is the leader of the free world, who in fact repeatedly said he was a post-partisan, uniting figure. Quoting my work here ain't gonna fly–it's a distraction, and comparing apples & oranges.
            Third, you repeatedly refused to offer any input of your own, remember? So we're doing what you wanted: going with my criteria (pol to pol, reason for incivility irrelevant, to name two) and the dictionary definition (which didn't include "unless someone feels it was provoked," BTW). You're not getting it both ways.

            You simply have no leg to stand on, Bob.

        • rational38

          “Incidentally, as far as people who “tend to be much less civil and more sensitive in response to disagreement” are concerned, you’ll have a hard time finding anyone who fits that description as well as Barack Obama.”

          Statements like this illustrate the impossibility of a serious conversations. Barack Obama (regardless of what you think of his policies) is perhaps the best tempered, most moderate, (in character) calm, civil man to hold the office. in a very long time. If you think he’s an example of uncivil you are unaware of the meaning of the word civil.

          Do you imagine making a list of people screwing up America is a civil undertaking.

          • Jeff Webb

            >>…If you think he’s an example of uncivil you are unaware of the meaning of the word civil.<>Do you imagine making a list of people screwing up America is a civil undertaking.<<

            Assuming that was a question, I consider Bernie's third book an observation of our present-day culture and societal condition. Have you read it?

      • allen goldberg

        Cannot disagree more. But believe anything you wish

    • allen goldberg

      the analogy is not valid/sorry

  • skate185

    Amen, Brother Bernie.

  • stevden

    This type of stuff also explains why in the 90’s the color Red suddenly came to be associated with the Republican party instead of the Democratic party which up till then had been identified with Red.
    Studies had come out that the color red gave a negative connotation to people…so…next thing you know RED is all over the Republican party when shown on the TV. Still to this day.

    • Daiv64118

      Thanks for verifying I wasn’t having a conservative hallucination. I remember when all the Democratic party states were in red too.

      • loupgarous

        The actual transition happened during coverage of the 2000 Presidential election. Until then, I always assumed Democrat districts showed up as red in election coverage because since the 1930s, the Democratic Party north of the Mason-Dixon Line functioned as the Communist Party’s Ladies’ Auxiliary. Coloring them pink would have been too obvious.

        • stevden

          Was it as late as 2000? I was under the impression it started with the 96 election, but I may be mistaken. I definitely remember Reagan and Bush 1 being dark blue across the board.

        • stevden

          “Red Neck” also was a Labor/Progressive/Union moniker originating with the miners of Appalachia. They were being organized by leftist labor agitators and to identify themselves they wore red neckerchiefs during their various rebellions.

        • Bob Hadley

          It’s interesting that you mention the coverage of the 2000 presidential coverage. The coverage given VP Gore during that presidential campaign was blatantly unfair. I’m unaware of Bernie ever conceding this. I wonder how it fits into the Right’s victimization analysis.

          • loupgarous

            What are you talking about, Bob? I can’t really remember one unfair thing said about Al Gore by the press. Not a single thing. If anything, the press very nearly enabled an illegal rush to “tune-up” the Florida ballots to favor Gore. YOU’RE the one doing a “victimization analysis.”

          • Bob Hadley

            Read my post again. I said “during that presidential campaign.” You’re talking about the post-election debacle. You need to read more carefully before reacting. That way we can have a more enlightening dialogue.
            Remember, all the press could talk about was VP Gore’s earth tone that he was wearing and his “serial exaggerating.” I think it was during the first debate h mentioned meeting with the FEMA head in Texas, when he really met with the asst. head in Texas. He met with the FEMA head in other states. The media was on Gore like white on rice. In that same debate, G W Bush said that the two men who had dragged that black man to his death in Texas got the death penalty and that thus a “hate crime” law would not have affected their sentence. But only one of the men got the death penalty. The media all but ignored this mistake. (I though neither mistake was worth blowing up.)
            The media also dragged up a supposed exaggeration by Gore concerning Love Canal from several years earlier. And the media misstated what Gore had actually said in an effort to buttress their claim that he was a serial exaggerator.

          • Derek Jude Tallman

            Considering that Gore won an Oscar for a two hour exaggeration people ate up with a spoon, I’d say the media were doing their job for once. As to the Bush assertion, he is correct. Texas doesn’t have a strong “hate crime” law, and the Jasper defendants would have received the same sentences. There’s a huge difference between forgetting one defendant received life without parole (and you don’t even mention the third, so I question how well you know the case), and misrepresenting concrete facts about an environmental issue to scare the hell out of people so they’ll vote for you. One is quite minor, the other was calculated, if “An Inconvenient Truth” and its laughable “science” are any indication of Gore’s commitment to honesty.

          • Bob Hadley

            I appreciate your desire to contribute to our dialogue, but try to stay focused on the issue at hand. The issue at hand was the relative treatment of VP Gore and GW Bush during the presidential campaign.
            Gore was obviously mistreated by the media DURING THE 2000 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. The media were obsessed with Gore wearing Earth tone, trying to look like an Alpha male and hiring Naomi Wolfe as a consultant. That’s just part of the mistreatment he received.

          • Bob Hadley

            As for your recounting that Texas dragging case, if there was a hate crime law, there might well have been no life sentence. That was a clear, however minor, misstatement of the case. On the other hand, VP Gore’s minor misstatement – that he met with the head of FEMA in Teas as opposed to the asst. head – was blown up by the media. In addition, Gore’s sighing during the first debate was blown up. Although his sighing was annoying, the media all but ignored the issues discussed.

          • loupgarous

            Gore IS a serial exaggerator. Actually, he’s a bald-faced liar. Don’t take MY word for it – the British school system won’t let its pupils watch Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” without a disclaimer outlining all the untruths in the film being read to them FIRST.

          • Bob Hadley

            You’ve again evaded the issue. In case you forgot, the issue is the treatment VP Gore got from the media during the 2000 presidential campaign. Gore has been given to exaggeration (e.g. inventing the internet) but the Love canal comment that he made many years prior thereto is not one of them. The media misconstrued his statement to support their narrative. They also dredged up some remark he once made about him and Tipper and the movie “Love Story.”
            More importantly, the media focused on Gore’s exaggerations and what he was wearing rather than the issues he raised during the campaign.
            It seems that you realize that you’re wrong, so you try to change the subject. Isn’t that what liberals do? (Actually, that’s what ideologues of all stripes do.)

  • Ho Leesh It

    I saw and example of this earlier today on News 13 in Orlando, FL. The talking headette described a group trying to block same-sex marriage as a “conservative group”.

  • Adrian Cano

    You’re right on. You speak about this on the factor too. Bernie, could u speak to the liberals at DISH network to put FOX News back on ? Until then I guess I can continue reading your columns and watching you on Real Sports.

    • David Nelson

      I used to have DISH. Seriously, they dropped FOX news? Looks like you’ll have to get your news from Democracy Now from now on. If I remember, DISH had dozens of channels like that telling you that the CIA blew up the Twin Towers on 9/11, and that the Khmer Rouge really got a bad rap in history (their intentions were good), and on and on. You know what? I don’t miss DISH at all, come to think of it.

  • Roadmaster

    This is only one “trick” in their repertoire. Another is ALWAYS mentioning the Party of a miscreant Weepubican, either in the headline or very soon in the text. A Dhimmicrat’s party affiliation is never mentioned until paragraph 43, IF it’s listed at all. There have been countless times when I had to search a persons name to discover his politics.

    The most egregious trick IMO, is the mention of race, or total lack thereof. The Down Stream Media has become so predictable with this strategy that when the race is NOT listed, you can almost bet with certainty that the perp/criminal has much more melanin than Bernie and me. Hey dummies – if the subject of the article has a name like Shaqwan Jefferson, or Atilab Mubungo, that’s sort of a dead give away, so the new tactic is to NOT mention the name. And there won’t be a booking photo either. Conversely, a white person will nearly always have the police pic published, or the most unflattering photo they can dig up.

    Hey Drive By Media – we are not idiots! But you however, are posturing, pretentious fools if you think you’re fooling anyone but the dumbest among us.

    • Uncle Dave

      Roadmaster, you’re spot-on. They also pull the photo trick with politicians; If it’s a Dummy-crat there will be a nice posed photo, maybe taken from their congressional or Senate web page, if it’s a Repub it will be a nasty pic of them yelling from the podum with their mouth open or something like that.

  • FloridaJim

    We see this so often it is not news any longer I simply refuse to listen to any Democratic media as they strangle blacks, Hispanics, children, and every blue city or state with their foul policies encouraged by the same media Todd won’t call by their true titles. When you were at CBS we, fools, trusted Cronkite, Rather and the rest only to learn much later how disgusting they were only Edward R. Murrow may have been a true journalist the rest are democratic or even Marxists mouthpieces. True or not?

  • beniyyar

    Bernie the mainstream media is deeply corrupted by it’s own arrogance, so much so that most of these liberal journalists don’t even care about journalistic integrity, it’s all about liberal agendas!

  • collins rose

    It took me many years to get over the practice of mentioning the race of any black person I talked about. In virtually every instance the race of the individual was irrelevant and was racist even though that was not my intent. Isn’t this example similar?

    • Josh

      I don’t want to come across as a progressive, blaming “culture” for something you are citing as a legitimate problem of your own you sorted through, but I think it’s very important to point out that the evidence is brutally overwhelming that polite PC society wants us to view each other by these factors.

      When one watches a KFC commercial with a black person making the chicken, I’d argue we’re programmed to question that: Is this racism? When one watches a reality show and a black contestant is voted off, we’re programmed to question whether racism was at work. When a news story breaks about someone who’s black getting into any type of trouble, we’re programmed to question whether or not he’s a victim who was forced into the role of a perp, or just a bad guy.

      Most everything that comes across the airways and through print is tinged with repeated qualifiers about a person’s race, followed up with emotional excuses for why a person of said race would act out in such a manner. E.g. “If only we spent more money on education!” “If only the prison industrial complex weren’t racist!” “If only we didn’t once enslave and oppress blacks!” And on and on it goes.

      I’m in no position to absolve you of anything you think you may have been doing wrong, but in my humble opinion, you’re just like the vast majority of everyone else in America. We’ve been trained like dogs to first and foremost judge people by topical factors like skin color, while simultaneously being whipped into submission for daring to profile people.

      If I said there were two girls up for a diversity scholarship, an Asian and a black girl, and asked you to pick the Asian, I have a feeling you’d be able to do it. Girl A had a 2.2 GPA, was suspended before for truancy, had disciplinary problems, and is from a low-income neighborhood. Girl B has a 3.8 GPA, perfect attendance, was a standout part of the school’s music program, and excelled at mathematics.

      And realizing that girl A is the black girl doesn’t make one a racist or even wrongheaded for profiling. This is the stuff that’s crammed down our throats. We’re told about these black issues while being blamed for them–as white society–in the same breath. We’re told that Asians excel because they don’t have the history of blacks. We are programmed to only notice race, and to stereotype people based on race, but still get our hands slapped for doing so.

      It’s the most sadistic experiment of social consciousness I could possibly think of.

      • collins rose

        I learned that what I was doing was wrong and changed my behavior. A point that I remember from the earliest Air Force Race Relations Training was to recognize that I do have biases and to not act on those biases. I have done my best to follow that principle in life and while on active duty in the Air Force. In that role I judged people on their behavior and performance and at times there were both white and black airmen who believed I was a nasty SOB. I don’t claim to be perfect, but I do my best.

      • Seven

        I had the privilege and opertunity to work with a fellow several years ago from the Congo who had a Doctorate. We worked together closely for several years. He told me how much he loved the U.S. I would ask what it was like in his home country. There were many natural resources he said, in his home country. Rich soil, minerals, and water. But one could not grow crops and take them from one region to another to sell because they would be killed. I asked why, and he replied that because they spoke different dialects of the same laugage. America he said, is not like that. One can drive all the way to California without anyone saying a word. Evil and hatred cares little about the color of ones skin. To me it seem a crutch for a few in this country to make money, make excuses, or cause havoc.

  • paperpushermj

    I watched and yes I to took note that the only one whose politics where labeled was the Conservative.
    I wonder how long Todd will be with Meet the Press?

    • Chris Matthewson

      2.5 years.

      • paperpushermj

        Is that when his Contract is up?

  • Seven

    Why even write about it. Just look at the ratings of the programs Chuck frequents. Common sence and several years of observation has convinced me that Mr. Todd is simply a talking d**k.

  • Patty Hayes

    Years ago, I started to notice a little ‘trick’ that Tim Russert used. In asking a question to a Democrat (or liberal), he would frame the question so that they could answer in the affirmative or agree with his premise. But with Republicans (or conservatives), he would frame the question (knowing full well) that they would answer in the negative or disagree with his premise. I don’t think it was even a conscious ‘trick’…it’s just that because he was liberal himself, he sought to validate his own beliefs. Todd’s ad libs over the years are a clear indication that he’s a liberal. Anyone who isn’t a liberal like him is a “foreigner” and he feels the need to label them.

    • Dan Lack

      The thing that used to surprise me about Tim Russert (may he r.i.p.), was that seemingly across the board, Republicans/Conservatives generally praised him as being pretty fair and gladly appeared on his program.. I still don’t get it, all these years later.

    • loupgarous

      The late TIm Russert didn’t strike me as being a tenth as biased as, say, Scott Pelley or a hundredth as biased as Charlie Rose or Chris Matthews. I used to watch Meet the Press quite often when he presided over it, and I can’t remember very many instances in which he did what you describe. I’m sure he had the usual bias anyone who wants to remain employed with NBC’s news division (once run by that foam-flecked bigot Laurence O’Donnell) has, but he managed to conceal it pretty well when I saw Meet the Press with him in it.

  • Libtard

    I don’t recall Blackwell ever appearing on Meet The Press or MSNBC. On the other hand Russert works for NBC and Walter and Robinson are frequent guests. Could that possibly explain it? Nooooo that couldn’t possibly explain it. It has to be left wing media bias. Why? Because left wing media bias is your claim to fame. Without it you would have to get a real job.

    As for you Langley, I don’t know what has gotten into you. You used to be fairly civilized but lately you have turned into arealprick. Stick to limericks because I don’t think you are man enough to waterboard me.

    • Glenn Sermos

      My sister could waterboard you. lol

      • Libtard

        Leave your mama out of this

        • Glenn Sermos

          Don’t have a mama. My son and I use yours. You don’t want to match wits. You’re unarmed.

          • Neil N. Pray

            Your sister is your mama. Your son is your brother. Your mama is your papa. Waterboard myass with your tongue youanal inbred hillbilly.

  • Derek Jude Tallman

    Do the news paper test. When a Republican gets in trouble, his party affiliation is either in the headline or the first paragraph. A lot of times, when it is a Dem, the party affiliation is buried in the second half of the article or not mentioned at all.

  • http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/author/malemattersusa/ MaleMatters

    Just one more thing that cost the Democrats big time in the mid-terms. How big? Let the far-left magazine The Nation describe it:

    “Since Obama’s victory in 2008, Democrats are down seventy seats in the House and fifteen in the Senate, giving an increasingly reactionary Republican Party the power to stymie most if not all of the Democrats’ agenda. But this actually understates the damage. Democrats are now the minority in over two-thirds of the nation’s partisan state legislative chambers, their worst showing in history. In twenty-three of these, Republicans will control the governor’s office, too.”

    http://www.thenation.com/article/192393/trouble-democrats

    • Drew Page

      More and more people are getting sick of Obama’s policies, his lies, his ineptitude, his divisiveness and his attempt to turn America into something most Americans don’t want.

  • kayakbob

    There is something else at work here too. The non-political label allows Todd, or whomever is anchoring, to project the notion that the “journalist” or “reporter” do not have an agenda…they are simply doing their job of reporting on Capitol Hill activities, while “the conservative” must have an agenda.

  • Ed I

    I am not sure which troubles me most, a leftist not understanding they are leftist or that they see conservatives, meaning anyone not a liberal, as somehow evil. Very few that do not track politics or the national media really can appreciate just how the left hates, not just conservatives, but any and everyone that they do not consider liberal. To the left the middle class, the common man, is stupid, ignorant and everything they believe is stupid and ignorant, even when it is easy to demonstrate that the middle class has far more common sense and practical intelligence than everyone on the left combined.

    • twin130

      I agree but I am also really troubled when they talk about the “extreme right” or “radical” wing of the party, as if conservative values and traditional beliefs are abnormal and dangerous.

      • doc holiday

        Only when they have been taken to the extremes that you now see in the Republican party, hell even some older members of the Republican party have switched over to being independents because of it (me included)

        • Jeff Webb

          In terms of federal offices, most GOP pols aren’t very conservative.

    • doc holiday

      You must not be reading the comments left by conservatives they call liberals every name in the book and some I am not sure I have heard before. The President is referred to as a commie or not American or he is trying to ruin this country and then they cry like little babies if anyone calls them on it. And be honest about this, all media is owned by the very rich and they tend to be Republicans/conservatives.

      • rational38

        It is an amazing blind spot some of these conservatives seem to have. I am assuming they are making these statement in good-faith, but it is hard to believe.

  • CQ

    To New Yorkers, the rest of the nation doesn’t count. To liberals, Republicans and Conservatives are stupid, toxic, dangerous to their idea of how the country should be run. Keep up the good work, Bernie.

    • Shane

      O’Reilly identifies commentators from both the right and left, which is fair. To just identify one guy as a conservative and not identify Robinson as a liberal was bias. The liberals in the MSM are not just biased, they are corrupt, and purposely slant their article to hurt cons and praise libs.

  • gerrT

    I read this this of reporting daily in the ultra-left Palm Beach Post. It is not only NYC. Hardly a day passes when they do not publish a anti-conservative editorial page cartoon. Their editorial writers are all ultra=left. Their story selection is anti-conservative. They refuse to publish letters who are critical of their ultra -left posts. I turned to CBS once after Chuck Todd began hosting Meet the Press. Once was enough. I am tired of these “slobbering liberals:. Well done, Bernie.
    P.S. Have added names of several of my conservative friends to your web page.

  • Drew Page

    Too often, people don’t pick up on the nuances and the verbiage used that many times color a story. There are subtleties that are often employed in journalism of which the reader may be unaware that can slant a reader’s perception. For example:

    “The Democrat candidate SAID his policies favor the middle class.”
    “The Republican candidate CLAIMED his policies favored the middle class.”

    See any difference between the words “SAID” and “CLAIMED”? Does one version sound more truthful or doubtful than the other? The difference is what called ‘verbs of negative attribution’. There are all sorts of devices authors and journalists can and do use to color a story, to create sympathy, or animosity for a person, that person’s point of view, comments or policies, such as the addition or deletion of descriptive adjectives and adverbs. In TV and radio journalism, film clips and audio sound bites can be, and are often, edited to present things out of context to make someone look good or bad, depending on the author’s and/or editors point of view. News agencies, radio and TV networks also engage in biased reporting by ignoring stories that may make those they favor look bad and only reporting on those things that make someone they favor look good.

    As you say Bernie, those caught in such biased reporting tend to feign innocence and disingenuously ask “What’s the big deal?” . They know what they are doing and why they are doing it. And it is a big deal. If it weren’t, they wouldn’t be engaging in it.

    • CQ

      Excellent point, Drew. Just try to trim the verbiage down – be more “pithy.”

      • Stimpy

        Don’t be a “pinhead”.

    • Dan Lack

      Thanks for the info on “verbs of negative attribution”…First time I have heard of that…it pays to read comments sections sometimes!

    • Josh

      I’ve never been a newsperson per se, but writing thousands of press releases in my life, I know the number-one rule is to go with “claim” unless you otherwise have a source to note. “Said” implies speaking from a position of authority or factual basis, whereas “claim” makes it clear that it’s either an opinion or unsubstantiated. In a political context, it becomes quite clear that “claim” carries a very negative connotation and almost condescending inflection. “The Republican claimed…” They might as well put it in quotations, as they’re undoubtedly doing those little air quotes in their mind when they write it.

      Language is powerful. So much so that some are pushing for worldwide hate speech laws if you offend, say, Muslims or any racial minority. So it’s very disingenuous for anyone to pretend, particularly liberals, that words don’t have a massive impact. The difference between “said” and “claimed” are evident in context; they are not synonymous; one implies fact, while the other expressly denotes opinion and even carries the inflection of mockery.

      • Drew Page

        Josh, I concur. You will note that it is primarily liberals that use euphemisms and politically correct language on a selective basis. Most conservatives refer to illegal aliens as such, while most liberals refer to them as “undocumented immigrants”. Most conservatives will call young law breakers criminals, while most liberals will call them “troubled youths”. Most conservatives will call the food stamp program, “food stamps”. Most liberals will call it a “Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. The euphemisms are selected with great care, to soften their impact and make some people, policies and actions seem softer, gentler and less threatening than they are.

        Liberals can also do the reverse and use terms terms to make people, policies and actions seem harder, rougher and more threatening than they really are. Conservatives may say they have a plan, liberals will call that plan a “scheme”. The liberals have no shortage of wordsmiths that have redefined the traditional meanings of words to suit their own purposes.

        • Josh

          “Youths” is my favorite, closely followed by “teens.”

          True story, and I will dig up a video link if anyone is interested. A group of black people were at McDonald’s, in their 30s and 40s, and they were throwing trash on the ground. Someone asked them if they would pick up their trash, and the group proceeded to beat senseless the responsible people who were anti-litter. During the reporting of the incident, the news did not refer to their race, but rather called them “youths” and “teens.”

          That should make Obama feel good, I would assume. He’s a youth president!

          Another of my favorites is when half a dozen networks and two dozen print publications and websites all begin using the exact same terminology, in the same articles, while claiming they’re all independent and impartial. “Fair share” and “war on women” spring directly to mind, but I’m sure anyone could think of a dozen more examples within a minute or two.

          They treat the rest of us as if we’re too stupid to realize. And while this has always been a simple postulate, I’ve always heard that it’s stupid people who assume everyone else is stupid because they’re not smart enough to foresee being noticed, whereas intelligent people understand that they may be called out.

          • loupgarous

            During the Ferguson riots, a young black lady riding in the passenger seat of her boyfriend’s car when he tried to run a county police detective down in a gas station parking lot lost her eye when the detective fired a bean bag at the car in self-defense and the glass on her side of the car shattered.

            Almost identical reports of this incident leaving out the self-defense motive for the firing of the bean bag at the car appeared simultaneously in Yahoo! News, the Huffington Post, firedoglake and other liberal outlets – all with the young lady’s name misspelled IDENTICALLY. No single report cited any of the other reports as the source of the information.

            Almost the only news report spelling the young lady’s name right was Samantha Liss’s report printed and carried by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in their online site. It was almost the only news report mentioning that the detective fired in self-defense after the car’s driver tried to run him down.

            Liberal news organizations either plagiarize when they need to get their propaganda out when it’s hot or agree on the narrative they’re going to inflict on their readers and viewers ahead of time.

    • A Centrist

      And when did “urban” become a word with negative connotations and “minority” come to mean only ‘certain’ minorities.

      • Drew Page

        Centrist, I’m not sure of the exact date. Liberals will say that the use of the terms “urban” or “inner city” by anyone who is conservative are racist code words. Of course if used by liberals, these terms are apt descriptions and are politically correct.

    • SkyCitizen

      Chuck who? Anyway, Drew has nailed it.

  • http://defineourterms.org Libertarian Observer

    Bernie … Good column. I always hearing your insight developed from many years in the journalism trenches.

    • Dan Lack

      Just curious if you might know…Bernie worked for many many years at CBS News, long known as the most liberal of the original 3 broadcast networks, going back to Cronkite and even Murrow before him…was Bernie generally considered a liberal, during his reporting years at CBS?

      • http://defineourterms.org Libertarian Observer

        I do not know, but I suppose it matter much less then.

      • Stimpy

        Anyone who makes the transition to conservative should be applauded. We need many more, even in my family.

  • Isahiah62

    “Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.” – Joseph Stalin

    If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers. -Thomas Pynchon, writer (b. 1937)

    The power to define the situation is the ultimate power. -Jerry Rubin, activist and author (1938-1994)

    ……………………….

    I actually embrace the term RADICAL, which any nonLeftist will be called these days- the counterculture of the 60’s, who think they are radicals, are the MAN, they are the establishment now, and we are the counter culture, we are the vanguard, those who dare refuse repeating the mob think.

    Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from that of their social environment. -Albert Einstein, physicist, Nobel laureate (1879-1955)

    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

    George Orwell

  • Isahiah62

    As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it. Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.
    -Gore Vidal, author (1925-2012)

    when I think of bias in reporting and unfair journalist tactics the name Candy Crowley jumps out as example of the worst sort- was supposed to CHAIR a debate (they have RULES!!) instead she used her position to challenge a obviously flabbergasted MITT & LIE FOR OBAMA.

    And so much more – MRC does a great job harvesting the cream of this crap

  • fitzsimmons Photography

    Bernie,
    Yet again, you exposed the more quiet bias that the left exhibits all the time.The New York Times makes me see read when they write about (there seem to be so many) New York poitical figures who are indicted or sent to jail for the horrible things that New York politicians do. They never tell the political party when it’s a Democrat but when it’s a Republican or Conservative, it’s in the first few words of the article……The other typical thing liberals do is, when one of there’s ex:Barack Obama does something very wrong, they say “Oh,they all do it” but you never hear those words when the shoe is on the conservative foot!
    Thanks again Bernie for holding up the truth flag.

  • Tim in California

    Bingo again, Bernie… you are right on… even in my own family, I’m the “conservative”, and the others are the mainstream, middle-of-the-road, moderates…. to liberals, there is no right/left. There is Right/Mainstream… Of course mainstream = the guys with the white hats…

  • Chrissy

    I agree that the mainstream media is biased, but doesn’t Bill O’Reilly on The Factor introduce Lesley Marshall as a “liberal” radio commentator? He also does the same for Alan Colmes, Jon Stewart, Kristin Powers, etc. Is Bill being biased? I suspect so, but The Factor is the show I want to watch, not Meet the Press.

    • Tim in California

      Yes he does, which I applaud… I hope he does the same with conservatives, to keep it honest on both sides.

      • Drew Page

        Very seldom does O’Reilly need to label his guests.. After a few words out of their mouths, you know if they are liberal or conservative.

        • chuck.tatum

          O’Reilly let’s his guests talk?

          • CQ

            Yes, he does. If you haven’t noticed that you haven’t been listening.

          • chuck.tatum

            Now YOUR bias is showing.

          • Drew Page

            I did say, “After a FEW words out of their mouths…”.

    • JamesBenson

      O’Reilly also introduces conservatives by identifying them as conservatives. He has done it many, many times.

      However, when it comes to Alan Colmes and his absurd defense of almost every idiotic liberal idea, O’Reilly is just letting the audience know that Colmes is a nutjob.

    • pasquale7

      O’Reily in NOT a news reporter. He is a talk show and express his opinions. He is really no different than Oprah. Tell me where I am wrong, Bill.

      • Chrissy

        O”Reilly is a news analyst, not a reporter, as he used to be. As moderator of Meet the Press, Chick Todd is not a news reporter. He’s acting in the same role as Bill O’Reilly, both hosts of shows that analyze the news. To me, Bill is far superior as a moderator than Chuck.

  • lark2

    Tim Russert was a professional …. he died and they should have buried MTP with him. I wonder what Luke Russert will become …. I hope he remembers his father and not the F. Chucks of the world. While the media is still made up of “deniers” … it’s not just the “on air people” … the folks above are the same and today, for some reason … “ratings” don’t matter any more so, what’s to be done with these people? I guess we should just not pay any attention to them and more importantly, we should just stop giving ANY visibility to anything they say.

    • Drew Page

      Oh, but ratings do matter. They matter a lot. Ratings determine a station’s or a network’s advertising revenue and money talks…very loud. No company will spend money to advertise on a show that gets very low ratings. MSNBC is coming around to that conclusion.

      • lark2

        Drew, that is the way things used to be but things appear to have changed. MSNBC viewership has been in the toilet for years. They often have less than 100,000 viewers. …everyone of their shows is dead last. CNN is in the tank . They have gone from the top of the mountain to the toilet. I read a report that showed prime time CNN viewership around 87,000 ! Other than the crazies … NO ONE is watching. Megan Kelly trounces Rachel Maddow daily. NO ONE watches Al Sharpton’s incoherent …”Politics Nation” . Meet The Press is in the tank. I don’t have any idea how these people justify Ad rates. I think there is a different system in play.

        • Drew Page

          It could be that parent organizations, such as NBC can afford to subsidize their “loss leader” just to be able to have a stage to turn their crazies loose on the ‘low information’ crowd, Retail stores do the same thing all the time. They will sell certain items below cost (loss leaders) in order to attract people into their stores.

          I don’t know if Ted Turner still has controlling interest of CNN or if they are under the control of some parent organization who want to use CNN as the platform for their political views. But CNN sure has fallen from the heights as a news organization to the depths of tabloid journalism.

  • VinBick

    I boycott shows on CBS, NBC, and ABC because they simply are over-the-top liberal hacks.

    • CQ

      I don’t boycott those networks; I tune them in about twice a year to see if they have changed – improved. Usually all it takes is five minutes to see that they are still biased, paying attention to the wrong things.

  • Simon Noel

    It’s clearly accurate to label Chucki as one of the Obama girls!!

  • Charles

    It’s a shame what’s become of the once great Meet the Press. Started with David Gregory. The format change makes it unwatchable. The content is another story. I’m 63 so I remember the history of this onetime pillar of American political television. I want my nearly unbiased MTP back with real journalists firing hard questions from both the left and right.

    • JamesBenson

      A long, long time ago… MTP was a great show.

      The questioners consisted of several members of the press who took turns asking tough questions of the guests.

      Changing the format to allow just one liberal (Even Tim Russert was a liberal) to ask the questions was a huge mistake. It allowed the host to slip his biases into the questions, by making the questions somewhat accusatory.

      There are many great journalists who conduct tough and fair interviews, but none of them are on the national broadcasts.

    • Drew Page

      David Gregory started his career as a journalist. He has set that aside in order to become a ‘celebrity’. He gets invited to all the big time liberal cocktail parties, gets to rub elbows with big shots and makes a lot of money. I can understand why he does it, but I wouldn’t believe a word the guy says.

      • CQ

        Are you really watching, Drew? Peter Jennings has been “off the air” for several years now.

        • Drew Page

          Yes, I do watch. Peter Jennings may not be a regular on the nightly news, but he does appear on camera in interviews for his perspectives. I used to enjoy Tom Brokaw when he started his journalism career. Back then, I couldn’t tell what his politics were. That’s about the best compliment I can give a journalist. I also enjoyed his book, “The Greatest Generation”. I was a fine tribute. Over the past ten years or so, it appears to me that Brokaw has gone from reporting the news to rendering opinions with a strong liberal bias.

          There is nothing wrong with expressing opinions, liberal or conservative, but opinions should not be presented as news. News should be reported, regardless of who it makes look good or bad, without opinion and without the ideology of the reporter or his editors slanting the story one way or the other.

          I like to chew my own food and I like to come to my own conclusions, without the aid of someone else doing it for me.

        • lark2

          Peter Jennings died August 7, 2005.

  • FAS1

    I don’t really put too much faith in what Chuck Todd says……because, quite frankly, he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  • floridahank

    While we all know that these biased and rather stupid people are the vast majority of news announcers on the major networks and newspapers, we can discount their influence on the brighter, conservative, open-minded listeners and readers, but the bigger danger is seen by following the money trail and finding out who the rich, powerful, decision-makers are running this circus. There is huge $$$ being donated to these nitwits, but who is behind it all — that’s the big question.

    • fitzsimmons Photography

      Start with Tom Steyer and George Soros and the hundreds that liberals won’t admit to because making and giving money is “bad”

      • Drew Page

        It’s only “bad” when rich people make and donate money to the Republicans. When rich liberals make and donate money to Democrats it’s fine.

      • floridahank

        It’s the relatively unknown liberals that donate that I would like to see publicized. The obvious ones don’t care if they’re made known publically, but the “hidden ones” would be great to be uncovered and made public. But the trouble is that even with the GOP backers, they would not like to reveal that knowledge because they have something to hide and they’re gutless too so nothing new will be revealed — hidden skeletons will remain hidden in our corrupt nation.

  • JayJ

    Why didn’t Ken Blackwell ask on air why he was labeled and why Eugene Robinson wasn’t?

    • JamesBenson

      Ken wants to be invited back.

  • Nick

    I also heard crap like this on the radio back when Gore and Bush were running. The newscaster was talking about the candidates economic plans if they were elected. The so called journalist referred to Gore’s as a “plan” and Bush’s as a “scheme”.

  • Barbara

    This has been going on for decades. One example I noticed in the 80’s is ‘pro-choice’ and anti-abortion’ used in the media and shows like 20/20. This was before conservative media and even Rush Limbaugh. Now that liberalism has taken over our schools, the culture for the most part, many people are blind to this or, at the very least, unaware. Sadly, I don’t see things getting much better.

  • ted

    “Liberals don’t own the word [denier], right?” Right. They also don’t own the word “CHOICE” which is that for which the Republican Party stands and NEEDS to promote. Choice in schools, choice in mortgages, choice in doctors, choice in what they pay for in health insurance, choice in consumer products, choice in where to live, where to work, who to hire…Republicans believe in choice. Democrats only believe in ONE choice and that ONLY for women: the choice to kill the fetus in her body. Everything else is chosen for them by Ivy League ELITES who know better than “We the People”.

    http://www.periodictablet.com

  • ted

    LiberalProgressiveDemocrats see their bias as mainstream — “everyone” thinks as they think. They are real. Authentic. The out-of-the-mainstream is “conservative” and thus needs to be so labelled. It has been going on forever and the reason I fear for the future of the United States. LPD thought is endemic to the Pre-K through Ph. D. “education” (propaganda) establishment, inherent to the entire entertainment (propaganda) industry and, of course, core to union boss thinking, trial lawyer riches and most government employee voting. An entire two or three generations are programmed “Left” and thus our country’s thinking is Left. Even to the new technology billionaires who don’t seem to understand that conservative, non-government free-enterprise made them rich.

    http://www.periodictablet.com

  • A Centrist

    If i had written this piece I would not have given the liberals the satisfaction of even suggesting there might be a reason for their ‘identity oversights’ other than their lack of knowledge and stupidity. And if there were an excuse not to identify liberals based on any form of reason, I imagine it has more to do with not wanting to have to identify the likes of Sharpton, Harry Reid, Obama, Jesse Jackson, Kwame Kilpatrick and others as liberals and thus make it obvious that you share their views.

  • Phillip MacHarg

    This is the sort of thing that drives me crazy. The labeling of conservatives by the liberal media. Chuck Todd was once not long ago a pretty good political reporter. But as things developed over time, he worked his way up the NBC corporate ziggurat and definitely knows where his bread is buttered. Never have I seen a more light weight interview than the one Todd recently did with the President. Oh, I forgot, there’s that loving hosanna to Obama that Tom Friedman blew our way! Suffice to say, Chuckie boy is now part of the liberal, media club and it’s a very safe and comforting place to be. No risk at all.

  • Peep

    If journalists weren’t monitoring other journalists, half of these TV news outlets would fold. If I was an advertiser, I’d be asking the ratings people to create a “news people” viewer demographic.

  • justintime

    CNN and NBC–the National Barack Channel–reporters are loath to criticize Obama. I could literally see the pain on their faces whenever they have to so much as even remotely say anything that sounds critical of “The Great One.” So much for objectivity in the free press. Chuck Todd of Meet the Press and Gloria Borgor of CNN are two of the worse with their love affair with Obama.

  • Mike

    Reminds me of a piece NBC’s Jimmy Roberts wrote about golf in parade magazine some years ago. Part of the subject material included George HW Bush and his connection to the game. As he concluded, Roberts said something like….”regardless of whether you agree with him politically or not”. The insinuation is clear and I doubt he ever would have said that about a democratic president.

    • fitzsimmons Photography

      Very good point. The media only use that term”whether you agree with him politically or not” with Conservatives. You will never hear that when talking about a Liberal….

  • Patrick Apple

    Excellent article Bernie.

  • Tony Rome

    Chuck Todd has his head so far up this Liar in Chief’s rear end that he is in touch with the small intestine. He will never see the light of truth!!

  • TruthBeTold

    Todds’ wife:

    Todd resides in Arlington, Virginia, with his wife, Kristian Denny Todd, daughter Margaret, and son Harrison. She is a communications professional and co-founder of Maverick Strategies and Mail, which provides direct mail and consulting services for Democratic candidates and progressive causes. She was spokesperson for the successful U.S. Senate campaign of Senator Jim Webb.

    • fitzsimmons Photography

      There we go!!

    • CQ

      We need more public disclosure of hidden alignments like this.

  • Joh

    Thanks Bernie. Anyone who is is remotely paying attention can tell who is liberal and is conservative on any of these panel shows, just by listening to them. Personally,I have tried to listen to the mainsteam media’s news and cannot stand more than a few moments. Take Charlie Rose for example; he has all the warm and charm of an unflushed toilet and seems to be stuck in the Camelot administration. He insists on calling China “Chiner”. He is a North Carolina native, not a Massachusset’s Kennedy! His black lady co-host proceded to take offense to a clip of a late night comic pointing out that Opra Winfrey had chosen of of her own quotes as one of the 10 best of 2014. Apparently pointing out idiocy is taboo at CBS is Opra is the target. Is it any wonder that the networls are losing their viewers?

  • TruthBeTold

    I clicked on MTP and saw Mr. Todd and Eugene Robinson laughing it up and I turned if off.

    • Drew Page

      Jon Stewart, Steven Colbert and John OLiver are where liberals go to get their “news”.

  • veeper

    Todd and Meet the Press are now interviewing comedians for serious political insight……

    I can’t think of a better way to announce that the show is a joke……..

  • vwman

    Chuck Todd. Another one of Obama’s w_ hores.

  • Lc Goodfellow

    Michael S.
    …. the Internet has created a generation of self-absorbed, addicted, distracted and ignorant people …
    Where do you fit in ?

    • veeper

      Certainly not in that self-absorbed, addicted, distracted place of ignorant people where you fit in……

      BTW……you forgot to say……Ha ha ha……

      • Lc Goodfellow

        Bernie’s crowd, just isn’t a high IQ crowd.
        Nothing funny about people like ‘Michael’ and you
        can look him up.
        “Me”
        I call ’em like I see ’em.
        And Fitz’ie you need help in reading comprehension.

        • veeper

          And, you know everyone’s IQ?

    • fitzsimmons Photography

      You must be a Liberal because your first choice is to attack the person and not the content!

  • Jim

    Bravo Bernie…great observation as usual. Todd is the A typical liberal journalist who gets a pass with his protégé, Chris Mathews….you just have to slap them up, and put them in their place as ‘elitists no minds’ that can’t stand the heat when conservative journalists debate them….like the big bad bully on the school playground that ‘finally’ gets KO’d by the skinny kid with the glasses… that’s all we can do in this wildly liberal social media we live with daily…. keep punching back!

  • John

    Who even watches that tripe called “Meet the Depressed?” ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC – it’s all one-sided, and the news comes directly from the admin. I never watch network or local news much because I know I’m getting their version of the news.

  • Seattle Sam

    When you’re always driving on the left shoulder of the road, those stripes in the middle of the pavement look pretty far to the right.

    • Drew Page

      That’s classic Sam, I love it.

  • Ed DCosmo

    The new lineup at “Meet the Press” is curious for several reasons, Bernie. As a newspaperman myself, I don’t believe anyone on the panel meets my definition as a member of “The Press”. Robinson, an Ann Arbor liberal, seems more of a “black columnist” than newsman.
    I’d be very much surprised if any of the others earned their spurs as a reporter anyplace other than Washington and, of course, Blackwell is there to keep the set from tipping over completely to the left. Nice that the network found a job for Rusert’s kid,w but NBC is an old hand at hiring family of Democrat politicians.
    The only mystery, Bernie, is why any viewer should bother?

    • loupgarous

      I’d say most “journalists” these days, confronted with the Canons of Journalism, would think you were talking about war correspondents.

      • Drew Page

        “Cannons of journalism”? Are you talking about the “big guns” that decide who gets to be “journalists” and who doesn’t?

        • loupgarous

          Well, as funny as that would be, the “Canons of Journalism” are a set of very strict guidelines for reporting the news and editing the news we were introduced to in high school journalism class.

          A few years later, I took a broadcast journalism class in college which basically was about then-current regulatory law (The FCC’s late, unlamented “Fairness Doctrine,” and the infamous Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission which upheld the very selectively-enforced “Fairness Doctrine” until it was abolished by the Reagan-era FCC) and had very little material specifically on how to present the news objectively and the ethical guidelines presented in the Canons to avoid conflating journalism with political advocacy or propaganda.

          If current journalism graduates get more than a token, lip-service exposure to the Canons of Journalism, it’s pretty clear that the experience didn’t mold their personalities at all. We have on-screen personalities who, under the guise of editorializing, call for politicians they don’t care for to be drenched in urine and feces (MSNBC’s Martin Bashir), choked to death or raped on car hoods (HBO’s Bill Maher), and make fun of the Romney family because one of Mitt Romney’s sons adopted an African-American child (MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry), among other abuses.

          These are the people who are pleased to call themselves “liberals.”

          Obviously, Chuck Todd doesn’t call left-of-center journalists “liberals” because people like Perry, Maher and Bashir have made the term a pejorative.

  • Brhurdle

    Excellent observation. Quite unconsciously, Mr. Todd was alerting viewers that opinions offered by Blackwell might be a little irrational. At one point, I would have been offended that a conservative would be treated with disdain. However, most people have accepted that other than FNC, TV media is dominated by liberal ideology – both straight news and opinion (and I readily concede that FNC is dominated by conservatives). Pick your provider based on your ideology since most reasonable people acknowledge and have come to expect this bias. FNC is wisely harvesting this split that has occured. The real problem will come when the media sponsors must face the anger of customers of the opposing ideology.

    • Drew Page

      So far, FNC’s sponsors have been pretty happy. I would assume then that the customers of those sponsors aren’t all that unhappy.

      • Brhurdle

        All of media, both print and televised, is a business that exists by selling advertisements. At some point, people will retaliate against companies that sponsor opposing opinions. As an example, if I used Brand X tootpaste and they sponsored programs on MSNBC you can bet that I would switch brands. When it becomes obvious to the companies that sponsorship is detrimental to product sales, they will drop sponsorships until the programs become unbiased and do not offend approximately 50% of their potential customer base.

        • Drew Page

          I believe the way most people retaliate is by tuning to programs more to their liking. I personally think that MSNBC news/opinion shows are worthless. I also believe that MSNBC’s rating show that TV viewers feel the same way. I am not going to stop purchasing a product or a service that I like, just because they were foolish enough to advertise on MSNBC. As far as I am concerned, those sponsors can broadcast their products and services to empty auditoriums, or out in the desert for all I care. If I like what they have to sell, I’m still going to buy it.

          If I used Brand X toothpaste and liked it, I would just switch channels and keeping buying the toothpaste.

  • Ken08534

    Rupert Murdoch DID buy newspapers, TV networks… But you knew that, right?

  • veeper

    chuckie is one of the most, if not the most, indoctrinated propagandist involved with news in America today…..

    He has been saturated with liberalism to the point of it being a natural part of who he is…..

    He has one talent and one talent only……the ability to remember poll numbers and political trivia……which he cherry picks to suit his liberal narrative……

    otherwise everything else he says has been written for him or comes straight through the filter of his liberal indoctrination…..

    Just as obama, chuckie is incapable of being honest with himself about himself…..

    • TruthBeTold

      I first became aware of Mr. Todd when he appeared on c-span. He seemed very interested in the intricacies of politics and I didn’t notice his bias.

      NBC must have seen him on c-span and quickly picked him up.

      Now he flaunts his liberal bias.

      • veeper

        because of his ability to spout poll numbers and election trivia he was viewed as a political genius by liberal “TV journalist” talking heads….

        he made for good comments to back up the liberal narrative……

        He was good at telling one side of the story……

        A young liberal Karl Rove type but lacking the political operative skill……

  • Dennis

    I saw a show on public television about the year 1964. Part of the show was about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which, according to the people who produced this show, was opposed by “Southern conservatives and other Republicans.” Does anyone believe that they did not intentionally avoid telling the truth that those Southern conservatives were all Democrats? If they were really unbiased they would have reported the fact, and it is a fact, that a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both the House and the Senate voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Do you think they want that little inconvenient truth known to the public? The reality is that it was the Republicans that shoved civil rights down the throats of Dems in the fifties and sixties and not the other way around.

    • Curt Parker

      Really a superb point, Dennis. Progressives have no sense of history. Thus, they would be shocked to learn about the reality you cited. But, as I implied by “would be” they will never learn the truth because in their silly world, the truth is relative.

    • loupgarous

      You see, the Democrats (and when I was growing up in Louisiana in the 1960s, there WAS no other political party in power) want to push that false narrative about the Democrats owning the civil rights issue. Liberal Republicans were very active in helping move the Civil Rights acts through Congress, and without their help – and Johnson logrolling votes from his party the good old fashioned corrupt way – there would BE no Civil Rights Acts. Judge Leander Perez, Democrat boss of Plaquemines Parish, actually built a concentration camp for activists incautious enough to enter his bailiwick, and he had white people who sent their children to integrated public schools fired from their jobs. The REAL Democratic Party at work.

      • gewineda

        Very, very true. I teach an American Government class as an adjunct professor, and under the civil rights chapters, make note of the Civil Rights Act that was enacted late in the 50’s under the Eisenhower Administration; lots of Republican support, as well as support of the more liberal Democrats, but the more racially biased Dems absolutely removed the teeth from the Act, rendering it useless and unenforceable. One could say that JFK’s death was the kick in the pants for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965; JFK would never have gotten those through Congress, but Johnson, one of the architects of the teeth pulling for the 50’s CRA, decided to reverse course and used his files and influence to get the 1964 CRA and the 1965 VRA passed with effective enforcement measures.

        That being said…as a Republican, I have to admit that many of the southern Dems later changed parties and became Republicans, despite the influence of the Republican party in helping to get the CRA and VRA passed, as the Republicans had been for long before that time uncomfortable with the federal government forcing local actions and the growth of budgets, national power, etc. Therefore, the presence in the Republican Party of people like Strom Thurmond was often used afterward to demonize the Republicans as racist. Very effectively, I might add, though mainly untrue for the party as a whole. And so the history of those times is now looked at as stuff “everybody knows”; the Republicans never supported Civil Rights, have always been racist, etc.

        • fitzsimmons Photography

          Why don’t the Republicans react to all the lies and false information. I’m tired of writing letters telling them that they need to be more assertive or even aggressive. The Democrats lie on a daily basis.Their constituents believe it all because it’s much easier to go to one source than to do real research….What Stephanie Cutter and David Axelrod did to Mitt Romney in the Presidential election was criminal. But I didn’t hear mass hysteria. The Conservatives still think they have to look and act a certain way or they won’t be thought of as ‘nice’ people. It makes my blood boil. The Conservative women have more cojones than the men do!!

    • TruthBeTold

      Journalist want to be seen as being on the right (or should I say correct) side of history so they champion the causes of anyone who claims they’re oppressed.

      Hence they jump on the side of any liberal pushing their liberal cause.

    • fitzsimmons Photography

      I can’t believe that more people and especially Republicans aren’t shouting this from the rooftops at every chance they get. There was a wonderful article in 2008 called The Missing History of The Democrat Pary( by Jeffrey York??), which explains how the Dems were AWOL and against freeing the slaves They voted against all of the amendments and bills the Republicans were trying to implement. Look it up. Every American should know this part of our history and the Dems are revising it every day!

  • Dan Lack

    I’ve never understood why more conservatives, don’t study journalism, and become journalists, and why more enormously wealthy conservative entrepreneurs, (ala Rupert Murdoch, the Koch Brothers, etc), don’t buy, or start major newspapers, tv news channels, radio networks, etc… The Wall Street Journal and Fox News are prime examples of how successful these type of enterprises can be…instead of complaining about liberal bias in the media…why not flood the zone with top grade, highly respected new organizations….and not just rely on the same old talk radio weapon.

    • TruthBeTold

      Journalism is now a largely liberal profession.

      Conservative journalists are, as Mr. Goldberg notes, identified and marginalized as conservatives.

      You have what I call the ‘Harvard Bias’.

      Most of these journalists come from the same liberal enclaves. They went to the same schools with the same teachers who teach the same liberal bias. These people can’t see their bias because to them this is how every intelligent and proper person thinks.

      The NYTs has their token conservative writers but it’s all for show; akin to saying, ‘some of my best friends are black’.

      • Dan Lack

        Assuming that what you say is true, I still don’t believe that conservatives need throw up their hands in defeat, with regards to journalism, such a critically important part of American life…Surely there is enough conservative big money, to establish top flight journalism schools, which would teach from a much more objective viewpoint, and be able to attract really bright young conservatives, who eventually could counteract the entrenched liberal journalistic traditions…so a combination of new vibrant schools, and new conservative media platforms, funded by committed deep pocketed conservatives, might be the answer…these things wouldn’t happen overnight, but over the long haul, it could very well be a workable strategy.

        • fitzsimmons Photography

          Conservatives need to flood the entertainment fields also because we are celebrity obsessed!!

          • Dan Lack

            I agree fully…what’s keeping them from doing exactly that?…Conservatives can surely be just as entertaining as Liberals, no?

        • TruthBeTold

          Conservatives aren’t throwing in the towel. They’ve moved to alternative media like the internet.

          They know their chances of being hired by a MSM news outlet is small.

          The good news is that many people are catching on and MSM news organizations are losing readers and viewers because they sense news reports don’t jive with their real-life experience.

          • Dan Lack

            I guess what I was trying to say is, why don’t Conservatives create a new “MSM”, with respected owners and reporters/commentators etc…rather than simply concede the label of main stream media to liberals, as has happened for decades…it wont be easy or happen overnight or be inexpensive, but its worthy as a long term goal.

      • Drew Page

        Is that why Bill O’Reilly’s program, The Factor, is so successful? It leads all cable news networks and has for fourteen years. MSNBC and CNN are going down the toilet.

    • veeper

      American news media, just as the U.S. government and education, has been infiltrated by communist to the point of being the domain of communist/liberal/progressive/democrats…..

      liberalism aka communism has been allowed to take hold in America in the areas that most influence and control America…..

      Good American citizens and patriots sat on their hands and kept their mouths shut for to long…….

      • Drew Page

        I don’t know about that “sitting on their hands” part. Most good Americans have been pretty damned busy trying to find and/or keep a job, feed their families, pay the rent (mortgage) and keep the heat and lights on. But I will agree, that too many have given up on voting and nothing will keep them as powerless as not exercising the power they do have at the ballot box.

    • loupgarous

      The issue is that the merchant bankers do better under Democrat administrations. Democrats don’t care about the nation’s bottom line, and in Congress, they’ll vote as they’re told. Great for Wall Street, which backs its bets on junk bonds and packaged defaulted loans with Federal loan guarantees. So the merchant bankers (Soros, Buffett, et al) support news organizations which push the Democrat narrative, and soon enough, journalists who are either conservative or thoughtful, independent liberals like Juan Williams lose their jobs in most of the news media.

      Journalists, ideally, should hang their political views up on the coat rack before writing. That’s how it has to be if people are to trust what they read. In reality, though, no newspaper has had that sort of editorial policy, and very few broadcasters, even under the FCC’s unlamented, selectively enforced “Fairness Doctrine.”

      You can go back as far as the early 1800s, and read newspaper articles that, in their partisan venom, could have been lifted right out of, say, the Rolling Stone during Hunter S. Thompson’s heyday, but for the change in idioms. There’ll always be at least a bit of slant in reporting, especially on political topics.

      But conservatives work at a disadvantage – most of them work for a living, and wealthy conservatives didn’t get that way financing financially shaky enterprises such as newspapers and broadcast networks. I think many of the people who’d like to fund conservative journalism are wisely waiting for the impact of the Internet to settle out.

      As many of us know, the old liberal magazines and newspapers are in financial trouble. The New Republic was just purchased by a software mogul, and defections from its editorial staff are legion as he’s taking it to a primarily Internet model – no more print copies. The New York Times is ripe for a buyout, and The Washington Post has been steadily drifting toward political center in its editorial policies since the Jeff Bezos buyout (although you can still read ridiculous covering for Obama such as a “fact-check” of the hilarious SNL sketch on Obama’s “executive action” on immigration policy where Obama keeps pushing the law down the Capitol steps).

      I think wealthy conservatives are just watching and waiting, and if they’re really wise, judging whether it’s worth taking a plunge in print or broadcast when journalism is increasingly moving toward the Internet.

    • Drew Page

      Rupert Murdock does own and operate newspapers and TV networks. But your point of other wealthy conservatives doing the same is well taken.

  • Hammockbear

    Great insight Bernie and thanks for sharing. As I read your comments, I knew in a nano second the very reason I stopped watching Sunday morning tv years ago. It nearly made me choke on my coffee. Apparently the Warning labels on cigarettes really Do apply to Sunday morning TV for me. But in reflection, I find it not only sad that this Is on tv but find it extremely insulting. I now enjoy Sunday mornings .

  • loupgarous

    I’ve run up against this issue in wikipedia (I edit articles there). In the wikipedia article on The American Spectator, one of their correspondents was mentioned as being criticized by four columnists from other news magazines – among them, Ta-Nehisi Coates, writing for the Atlantic Monthly, Matt Steinglass of the Economist, and Patrick Howley of the Guardian for “conflating journalism with politics” when he posed as a protester at the National Air and Space Museum.

    Excuse me? The Atlantic Monthly, Economist, and Guardian all have very unmistakable leftist political agendas. It’s perfectly legitimate to mention controversy like this in a wikipedia article, but what one must NEVER do is lend what gravitas wikipedia has (and we’re working hard to redeem our reputation, with real standards of objectivity and sourcing, better than some print encyclopedias I’ve used) to one side of a political wrangle. Wikipedia’s got a very strong stance on “neutral point of view.”

    But the editor who set this down didn’t mention that a correspondent from a conservative magazine was being pilloried by columnists from three liberal magazines, leading the reader of the article to think that the The American Spectator was being judged solely on journalistic criteria, and not on his politics. When I was younger, correspondents from Harper’s, The Rolling Stone (most notably Hunter S. Thompson), and other leftist magazines were constantly running articles like the one attacked by the three leftist columnists in the three leftist magazines. Oddly, no one mentioned any of THOSE.

    • TruthBeTold

      Thank you for fighting the Wikipedia fight.

      Wikipedia is great for finding facts like demographic numbers on cities but the liberal bias of the contributors and their support from Wiki gatekeepers is outrageous.

      Go to the Wikipedia entry from the Klu Klux Klan.

      The second paragraph shows us who’s involved shaping the KKK narrative; the SPLC and the ADL.

  • John

    Just like the ratings of MSNBC, the ratings of this show are in the tank because of crap like this. And it’s only the tip of the iceberg. Todd becomes a bulldog of a journalist when he’s interviewing conservatives but suddenly starts pitching softball questions when it’s a liberal who he’s interviewing. The sad part of it is that he doesn’t even realize it. What’s NBC going to do now given that Todd
    s ratings are lower than Gregory’s were.

    • loupgarous

      Back when Tim Russert was alive and running that show, there was at least a modicum of objectivity and fairness. Now, it’s just “Hardball with Chris Matthews” without the sexually ambiguous subcrural tingles.

      • Hammockbear

        You are so correct. Thanks for the reminder of Tim Russert. When he died, I stopped watching.

        • m2plaid

          His son apparently is being groomed by Todd to be the next ‘moderator’. Hopefully, Luke will be like his father and not the ass hats on MTP now.

          • Hammockbear

            From what I have seen, Tim’s son is a man of his own. He was raised to think with an open mind. I believe he will accomplish a great deal in his lifetime.

      • JanelleHumbert

        “Foulball With Chris Matthews”.

        • ScranunSlim

          More like “NERF-ball” with Creepy Matthews, last seen leering at Erin Burnett)

    • Russ Perrine

      Replace Todd with Luke Russert. It’s time — and he has paid his dues.

    • vwman

      Todd is an Obama whore.

    • Stimpy

      Who is Chuck Todd? He is already pretty marginalized in my opinion — I don’t recall ever watching him.

  • JewelStratford52

    Thank you for adding a voice of reason to current discussions. Keep up the good fight.

  • jazzdrums

    and to introduce Bratton with video history of racial tension was one thing, but how many centuries did they want to go back. The point was to talk to Bratton and the last time there was NYPD problems of not was the 70s. Some of us 1 and 2 born in American can identify with racial tension in the stone age but rather what our parents and grand parents went through on their home countries. Chuck Todd himself is left leaning bias and the line of commentating and reporting is getting blurred on all news outlets, cable and broadcasting. and sometimes the bias is inherent in the stories they choose…PBS Newshour.

  • Michael S

    Watch FOX Bernie its always 4 teabaggers to Jaun Williams LOL DUH

    • LAPhil

      His name is JUAN, not JAUN. DUH!

      • Michael S

        his name is FOX for morons lacky !

    • Lc Goodfellow

      … How do you write with your mouth full … ?

    • loupgarous

      Keep posting. We like that your grammar and spelling are right down there with your manners and politics. You do more to show everyone what leftism’s all about than a week of “Fox and Friends.”

      • Michael S

        my replies are in are in FOXTARD language just for you!

        • Charlie

          Michael, when I come across people like you I figure you must have got your butt kicked so many times for using the “n” word so now you have discovered that mentally challenged people aren’t as tough. I have a daughter that struggles with this every day. I will never accept people like you. Your political rants are rendered meaningless because you are a mean-spirited person.

          • Michael S

            Sorry charlie the N word is used by Republican conservative racist Teabaggers DUH not liberals DUH!

          • Charlie

            Even if true, it doesn’t lessen or excuse your intolerance for a group of Americans who are mentally challenged. You serve as a perfect example of what Bernie said above.

          • Michael S

            I agree 75% of all Republican conservative teabaggers are mentally challenged and committed to taking us down again with more Foxtardian votes! One more Bush will do us in for good!

          • Charlie

            Obviously you can’t read for comprehension. I tell you my own daughter is mentally challenged yet you seem to keep thinking you can toss around disparaging comments about her condition. I think I’ve figured out what kind of person you are. So tell me. How was it when you celebrated your 40th birthday all alone in your parents’ basement with nothing but a keyboard and an internet connection to keep you amused?

      • Michael S

        I”l just refer to you as Super Foxtard who made it to 10th grade! LOL

      • TruthBeTold

        He sort of proves Bernies’ point. He cites one new group he believes is conservative. What does that tell you about what he believes about every other news outlet?

    • ScranunSlim

      There’s the bell, Mikey — don’t be later for Homeroom

  • k962

    The condescending left never fails to disappoint! They carry themselves as the only ones capable of thinking and everybody else just part of the mindless masses!

  • Jim Voorhees

    “Well I have many black friends” – same approach, same reason

  • Michael S

    ha ha and this idiot Goldberg works for the most destructive divisive fake news organization in America! FOX for morons NEWS!

    • k962

      Go back and watch MSNBC and the rest of the useful idiot brigade!

    • LAPhil

      Yeah, yeah, yeah. You FOX News bashers are really getting tiresome.

      • Michael S

        average IQ of FOX viewer is their shoe size

        • LAPhil

          Since you’re so obsessed with Fox, how is it you know so much about how bad they are? I know, you’re a closet Fox News watcher. I’m still waiting to see if you have enough intelligence to make any original comments.

          • Michael S

            Fox is my comedy channel youbetcha! hahahahahaha

        • veeper

          Proof……..

          • Michael S

            go to youtube and watch the fox rally’s for teabaggers in 2010 hahahahahaha

          • veeper

            what does that prove about the average IQ of FOX viewers?

            or their shoe size…….

          • Michael S

            well I was watching that weekend Teabagger rally in 2010 and the fat guy with no teeth I will never forget there he stood with his FOX tee-shirt his teabags blowing his free fox chili dog running down the front of his shirt, teabags blowing the wind on the brim of his hat and he told the Fox interviewer Hanity the clown ” I want the government to keep their God Damn hands of my medicare! hahahahahahahahahaha Little did the Teabagger know Hannity if he could will kill the poor slobs medicare on the spot if he could! LOL about a size 10 shoe and a 10 IQ lol

          • Josh

            If we can get some witnesses and a neutral third party, I’ll put $100 in escrow right now that says myself, and any 12 random people you pick off of this site, can best your IQ score by an average of at least 15 points (I got an extra $100 says I best you by 20 personally) in a live-time test.

            Want it?

          • Michael S

            first you get some teeth hahahahaha

          • Josh

            So, this is you running away from a direct challenge? I though Fox News viewers had IQs that matched their shoe sizes. Surely a nice fresh $100 delivered to you, $200 if you come within 20 points of me, is some great incentive.

            A liberal such as yourself can do big things with that money! Like, for instance, purchasing the new iPhone while complaining that America is too materialistic. Or maybe spending insane amounts of money on a Starbucks beverage while moaning with your fellow hipsters about how capitalism has ruined the world. Or maybe you can walk by some homeless and needy with money in your pocket before blogging later that evening about the government needing to do more for people. The possibilities are endless!

            It’s not a ton of money, but it is easy money, if what you say is true.

            Then again, anyone who thinks teeth are correlated with IQ might not want to enter into a contest of wits. You seem easily stumped. Multiple choice might really bring you to the brink of PTSD. On the bright side, you can join up with the anti-Fox community as they try to push through legislation that would make PTSD-inducing hate speech on Twitter a federal offense.

          • Michael S

            Well Leroy you using the phrase BEST YOU tells me you need your 200.00 to save the 2 teeth you have left! last time I heard wording that bad was way back when my kids were 3 years old learning to talk! daddy i bested you. hahahaha your a real true teabagger Foxtard! LOL

          • Josh

            Please, oh ye great one of mighty grammatical prowess, explain in detail how “best you” is inaccurate wording to use in such a context.

            And if you’re trying to insult someone, please, at least make sure someone can read your insults. Speaking of “3 years old,” that seems about the level of grammatical skill you possess. It’s “you’re” — the contraction of “you” and “are,” as to say, “You are a real true teabagger.”

            “Your,” which is a possessive pronoun, makes the insult very confusing. My “real true teabagger” what?

            I’ll leave alone the redundant double adjective and the misspelling.

            Suffice to say it seems quite apparent why you’re running away from cashing a check you wrote earlier. Nothing in the bank, far as I can tell.

            But I’m sure you can fix that with a few forced “LOL” or “hahahahahahahahs”

          • Michael S

            Well Leroy you take your Best you grammar take it to any grade school in America except the top 10 poor red states in America that have chit school systems and head to a first grade class room and try your best you blubber on the teacher hahaha DUH

          • Josh

            I’d be embarrassed to write like a grade schooler while pretending to be intellectually superior. Then again, I’m not a bigoted progressive who feels the ends always justify the means, so long as the proper target–e.g. conservatives–is being attacked.

            We know your character and courage are lacking tremendously. Hell, I’ll spot you the $100 just to see how well you do in a test vs. any 12 random people you select off this blog!

            Hell with it, I’ll pay you $100 to do it! More than worth it to watch you barely break triple digits while the people you insult run intellectual laps around your barely-English-speaking ass.

            Go on and get your last word in here. We both know you need it like crack. Add a final “LOL” to really drive the point home that you don’t have a point. And keep on trolling around here like you’re superior, knowing you’ve been called to the carpet and ran away like a punkass chicken.

          • Michael S

            ok Teabagger hahahahahahaha

          • Michael S

            Hey Leroy your missing Hannity the clown hes on now! hahahaha

    • loupgarous

      …and guys who go “ha ha” at the beginning of a sentence are mighty thin on attic insulation. Not to mention the rest of your post, which leads one to believe your Thorazine prescription ran out a while back….

      • LAPhil

        His one brain cell is stuck on “Fox News is stupid, Fox News is for morons, Fox News lies.”

      • Michael S

        hahahahahaha foxtards crack me up !

        • loupgarous

          I don’t WATCH Fox. Don’t even get cable. Waste of time.

          • Michael S

            well how un-American hahahaha

          • loupgarous

            Glad YOU find your comments funny. That makes one of you.

    • Dennis

      I have some disappointing news for you. I have watched a lot of news over the years on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and even MSNBC and I find FOX to be far and away the most even-handed, unbiased, objective news source we have. Yes, you can find conservative views on FOX and I realize those oh so tolerant liberals would totally ban that if they could. You can also find Liberal ones and middle of the road ones. The reason liberals hate FOX so much is that when you have a liberal and a conservative discussing an issue, at least 90% of the time the liberal comes across as an irrational, emotional thinking lightweight next to the rational, well reasoned conservative. In short, when the public actually get a comparative look at both sides, the liberal comes out looking like, well, a liberal.

      • Michael S

        In all you TV watching did you see the last 2 Bush presidents lead us into massive recession and war? Stay tuned FOXTARD NATION is going to try and sell you a 3rd Bush stayed tuned! LOL hahahahaha

    • Jarob54

      Not feeling well today?

      • Michael S

        I feel GREAT!
        lol

  • Jarob54

    He mentioned conservative as to announce they offer both sides to an issue. Yeah right, they don’t

  • tdivison

    Once again Bernie, you nailed it. I believe as well intended Chuck may be, he truly is blind to his own bias .

    • Michael S

      yes and i bet you think Fox for morons news is real! LOL

      • LAPhil

        Do you ever say anything else? You must be a troll from Mediaite.

        • Wally

          Don’t worry about him, his being here reduces MSNBC’s listening audience by 50%.

      • Lc Goodfellow

        …. you sure got it bad for “… tea bags … ” stay out of the Bath House and they will leave you a lone.

        Also, you’ve got a hell of a long way to post for the Toaster.

        “… fools who’ll believe almost anything, and accept almost any government action to address it, no matter how ridiculous, as long as the delusion makes us feel good. “

        • Michael S

          I know Reality the last two Republican presidents lead us into stupid wars and massive recession! and that’s fact and you morons are talking a 3rd Bush hahahaha

  • Century6

    Bernie,
    I’m speculating that if you ask Chuck Todd why he identified Mr. Blackwell as a conservative but did not label Mr. Robinson as a liberal (which he proudly is) is to prove to his critics that his show does offer/seek conservative voices. Since the liberal view is ALWAYS the majority on Meet The Press, Chuck feels an obligation to loudly proclaim that “see, we have conservatives on my show.”
    Still Bernie, I agree with your point; and wish liberals would stop the practice.

  • Stephen

    Brilliant insight Bernie. I never thought of it as a warning label but that really gets to the heart of the matter.

  • Brian Stover

    Why don’t we leave out the labels…especially the non-factual, judgmental ones?
    Who is the authority of who is “Liberal,” “Conservative” or “Moderate?”
    Doesn’t the label change with the issue? Can’t someone be for both human rights and a strong defense?
    Will we ever get to the point where media will do honest reporting and let us decide?

  • JMax

    ask 1,000 liberals if Chuck Todd is a liberal.

    • Josh

      Create the petition; I’m interested to see. I’m always fascinated by who’s taken in or pushed out by a group of anyone depending on the context of the situation. E.g. Tim Wise = a progressive champion! A beacon of light in a dark, archaic right-wing nation! A leader in cultural diversity, invited to speak at the nation’s most prestigious universities. Until, of course, he wrote a lengthy piece which literally called for the extermination of white people. Suddenly, “Wise isn’t one of us! Never heard of ‘im! Who’s this Tom Weaze of which you speak?”

      Just like asking 1,000 Christians if the Phelps’ are Christians, my guess–and it is only a guess, of course–is that 800+ would say no. But the Phelps’ themselves would claim they’re Christians. So, who do we listen to in that situation?

      Who holds the name badges at the liberal sign-in table?

      • JMax

        Chuck Todd would not claim to be a liberal. Conservatives may think he’s a liberal because he appears on MSNBC, but then so does John McCain.

        Chuck Todd was a reporter and now he is a Sunday pundit show host. There is nothing liberal about him, and I challenge you to cite a journalistic peace, op-ed, or any other such evidence that he is a liberal.

    • Tim Ned

      I believe they would say he’s straight down the middle. And the far left would say he’s part of the cable news industrial complex. Scary as that may be.

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      Good luck finding 1,000 liberals who know who Chuck Todd is.

      • tdivison

        Wasn’t he on dancing with the stars?

        • loupgarous

          I thought he was in that spy show – you know, the one on NBC about the CIA intern who got beaten up by sexy girl spies a lot….

      • JMax

        Most any liberal knows who Chuck Todd is. They write articles and blog comments critical of him after almost every episode of Meet the Press and have done so for years before his current gig.

        • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

          >>Most any liberal knows who Chuck Todd is.

          Wanna bet?

  • Peacock

    I don’t recall Blackwell ever appearing on Meet The Press or MSNBC. On the other hand Russert works for NBC and Walter and Robinson are frequent guests. Could that possibly explain it? Nooooo that couldn’t possibly explain it. It has to be left wing media bias.

    As for you Langley, I don’t know what has gotten into you. You used to be fairly civilized but lately you have turned into arealprick. Stick to limericks because I don’t think you are man enough to waterboard me.

    • Tim Ned

      “On the other hand Russert works for NBC and Walter and Robinson are frequent guests. Could that possibly explain it?”

      So how do Walter and Robinson lean? Hey, I need to know. In the opinion of Meet the Press, I needed to know that Blackwell was a conservative so I just want to know where Walter and Robinson lean.

      Wait; could it be that Todd believes they’re in the Center? OMG could it be that?

      • Peacock

        They lean liberal as if you didn’t know. Do you even know who Blackwell is let alone which way he leans? Do you think he took offense at being introduced as conservative? Do you take offense at being called conservative?

        • Tim Ned

          “They lean liberal as if you didn’t know.” Officially I think their banner reads “Lean Forward”.

          Answer to question 1; Yes. question 2. Don’t know as I haven’t watched meet the press after Tim Russert passed away. Question 3. Only when my wife says I am.

          • Peacock

            Forward? Ok have it your way. And If you and Goldberg think it is media bias then go right on believing that. Maybe Goldberg is just putting us on with this article? Whatver, it is a silly article and a silly conversation. Is your wife a liberal? If so you should let her talk some sense into you.

  • Bob Hadley

    “They put warning labels on packs of cigarettes and pesticides because they can be dangerous to your health. And, as far as many liberals – both in and out of the media — are concerned, conservatives need warning labels because their ideas can be dangerous to your health. I mean, if liberal views are middle of the road, moderate and mainstream, conservative views, being the opposite, must be fringe. And fringe ideas, in the liberal worldview, are most likely racist, homophobic and misogynist ideas, which are … well … dangerous!”
    There you go again!
    You raise two separate issues – 1) alleged malevolence/ignorance of “warning” labels and 2) that these so-called warning labels are issued one-sidedly.
    If these labels are malicious/ignorant, you would certainly object if they were applied indiscriminately: what kind of comfort does it give that the media has bipartisan malevolence/ignorance? And to paraphrase O’Reilly, bad behavior does not justify (or neutralize) bad behavior.
    I think you’re engaging in overkill – how much is an emotional reaction and how much is business acumen is another question. The labeling to which you refer is a disclaimer letting the viewer know of a potential bias. It’s similar to when a Fox News host introduces a pundit with the disclaimer that he is a Fox nNws analysis.
    If you really think introducing someone as a conservative analyst is malevolent and/or ignorant then why don’t you criticize O’Reilly and other Fox News talking heads when they introduce someone as a liberal analyst or working for a liberal publication?
    I agree with you to the extent that it should be even-handed.

    • brian_in_arizona

      I watch Fox a lot and cannot recall situations in which an invited guest is introduced as being either liberal or conservative. The organizational affiliation of guests is always disclosed, and one can often surmise where they fit on a political spectrum from that.

      I will watch more closely in the future and see if what I remember is correct.

  • gold7406

    Bulls eye, Bernie. Just as the liberals labeled the Tea Party as ruthless as al qaeda and now we have the administration and de Blasio demonizing the police.
    They love to draw the line in the sand. If your not with us, you’re the enemy.
    It’s an elite fraternity, if you’re not on the same page you get blackballed and ridiculed.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    I’m really annoyed that you suggest “water boarding” these liberals is a bad idea. Frankly, I suspect that may be the only way to save American civilization. Water board these libtards until they recant. (or at least grow a brain)

    • ScranunSlim

      Let’s Keep It Safe, Legal & Rare
      – WATERBOARDING

  • Josh

    I really want to agree with you, but only three paragraphs in, my brain is screaming at me that I hear Bill O’Reilly do this every time I watch him as he’s introducing some “liberal” or “Democratic” something or other.

    But coming from liberals, I’m not the least bit shocked or surprised. They are the ones who typically tend to view people by any and everything except who they actually are. Obama’s not a father, a husband, an accomplished person in law, or even the POTUS. He’s qualified as the “black” all those things. A random gay person can’t be just a person, they’re the “gay” whatever they are.

    This is how the “diversity is our strength” mantra has poisoned their minds. Instead of seeing people, they’re only capable of seeing the qualifying criteria which would place any individual into a group that’s separate from another group.

    When you run around the skeptic community, which is where a lot of progressive causes come to a crossroad, you run into this sort of thing often. What’s the difference between Anita Sarkeesian and Jack Thompson? For their ideology, nothing really. They both think video games cause violence, should be changed if not outright banned, and they are on a profiteering crusade to change the landscape of entertainment. But that’s not what liberals (Anita’s fans) see. She’s a woman. She’s a female game researcher; she’s a female pop culture critic. No matter what else she is, or how good or bad she is at it, she is always a female first and foremost. Just as her apologist white lady knight, Anna Akana, is always an Asian before anything else. It’s important that you know she’s Asian, just in case you might want to critique her to the same standards of white people, apparently. She’s an Asian! Tread carefully!

    “Conservative columnist” is, in my opinion, just for the panel’s benefit. To me, he’s basically saying, “This guy’s a conservative; keep that in mind when speaking to him.” That’s a trigger word that allows liberals to know everything is fair game, whereas “black” or “Asian” or “transgendered” would mean, “Hey, Bub! Slow your roll. You must treat this person completely differently than you’d treat anyone else.”

    Diversity is our strength!

  • Russ Perrine

    I would think its time to place Luke Russert on the short list to anchor Meet The Press. He logically has an insight as to how the program might continue during the next decade. His dad relished the chance to evaluate the candidates as they appeared (and sometimes disappeared). Chuck Todd has plenty of morning TV juice to work with.

    Why delay the enivatable?

  • Cheryl

    Great observation, Bernie. It explains so much. I have the same issue trying to have a conversation with a liberal. They so often refuse to acknowledge even the validity of opposing thoughts, let along give serious consideration to those ideas. I also read on Twitter that one of the “pundits” on MTP on Sunday, when asked to explain their comment, said “I read it somewhere”. Did you hear that comment as well? If so, it certainly gives serious concern to the journalistic integrity of MTP.

  • jonmichal

    Nail on the head Bernie