Matthews v KO feud?

Keith Olbermann Stuff From 2007 and Earlier
User avatar
CapitalL
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:51 pm
Location: Phoenix

Matthews v KO feud?

Postby CapitalL » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:07 am

I saw a little discussion about this on another thread about presidential candidates, but I was wondering how many people have noticed the sometimes subtle and not-so-subtle digs between Chris Matthews and KO.

Matthews was pitching his new book against partisanship in CSPAN and mentioned Olbermann as an example of partisanship, then making the arguement that such behavior is tearing our country apart. I've heard a few negative aside comments on Hardball, too.

I think KO's gotten a little tired of the dissing, because he mentioned in his Bill Moyer's interview that Matthews was beside himself with accolades for Bush at the now-infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech. During their coverage of the event, KO said he was trying to point out that the imagery was out-of-whack and he wasn't so sure the speech was going to be such a great historical moment for Bush, but that Matthews wouldn't hear of it because he was basking in Bush's glow. If I recall, KO was making the arguement that journalists can sometimes lose their objectivity when they get caught up in their emotions.

I bet Matthews feels a little threatened that KO is getting so much attention. At the CSPAN speech, he was making a very concerted effort to show how much experience he has in politics. Don't get me wrong, I'm actually a longtime fan of his, so I'm a little disappointed in his apparent insecurity. Like the right-wingers, he seems to want to rely on emotional arguements to complain about KO, rather than trying to tackle the content on C/D.

Quanlin

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Quanlin » Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:57 am

I think it's nice to have a little competition between the two of them. It's also nice that they're both professional enough to sit side-by-side to cover election night and other big political events like that. Let them challenge each other.
Matthews isn't perfect, but he's a good sight better than Scarborough, for example!
If Rachel Maddow did get her own show, it would add another intellectual heavyweight into the mix. All the better.
I want more brainiacs on MSBNC!!!
No more idiots like that woman with the horrible voice. I forgot her name already.
-q

User avatar
dejapig
Site Admin
Posts: 7312
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:36 pm
Location: Houston & Phoenix

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby dejapig » Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:25 am

Rita Cosby?
Be who you are & say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter & those who matter don't mind. --Dr. Seuss
Keith Olbermann rocks! --dejapig

Quanlin

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Quanlin » Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:46 am

Right.
-q

Lauralu
Posts: 3980
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:07 pm

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Lauralu » Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:12 pm

Rita Cosby, aka, Throaty McWhorey :P

oldladyinashoe

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby oldladyinashoe » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:01 pm

Lauralu wrote:Rita Cosby, aka, Throaty McWhorey :P


:LMAO

User avatar
CapitalL
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:51 pm
Location: Phoenix

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby CapitalL » Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:52 pm

A little intellectual competition is nice, but I was miffed that Matthews seemed to lump KO into the same partisan milieu as O'Reilly, et al. It all goes back to this idea of fake balance. He seems to think that standing up and calling the Bush admin out for its transgressions is somehow unhelpful to the country. It's that sort of weak-kneed attitude by dems that allowed Bush to walk all over the constitution, public faith and truth. Bipartisanship is great only if you stand your ground on the important issues, otherwise what you thought was co-operation is more like capitulation.

User avatar
Early Blake
Posts: 760
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:01 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Early Blake » Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:20 am

My favorite is still what Keith said after the first MSNBC sponsored Democratic debates. The production crew cut from Keith to Chris Matthews and when the crew cut back to Keith he said, "No one gets a word in edgewise with Chris Mathews around".
Image

Quanlin

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Quanlin » Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:06 am

Well, I don't know how Chris phrased it, but KO is not your typical straight-down-the-middle newscaster, and that's why we like him.
I do see the point that's he's the flipside to O'Reilly in some ways, but then certainly not in others. I think it's a bit dishonest to say he's not partisan at all, and then say it's great that he never takes the administration at their word.
If he just came out and called himself a liberal (progressive, whatever), he wouldn't lose any credibility with me at all. But it's not people like me that he's afraid of losing by doing that. And if he wants to convince people that he's not to the left, calling out the Dems for not being "left" enough, whatever that means in the circumstance, isn't not not being left. Criticizing each party some of the time doesn't make you a centrist.
If a libertarian guy criticized both political parties for having anything at all to do with taxing or spending (you know, the role of government in normal society), then that doesn't make him less of a whack job. He's still occupying a position and advocating it, so he's not straight down the middle either.
I think the really dangerous thing is to believe in straight-down-the-middle like it could really happen.
It's reading a church press release about the weather in heaven with a straight face, because the church has leverage over the news givers, that's really scary (example taken from Stranger in a Strange Land by Heinlein).
KO keeps saying that the money will set you free. I'm uneasy about the setup today, to put it lightly, but I hope he's telling us the truth about that, and that it will stay that way for a while. I can certainly see that relationship crumbling into straight-up state-controlled (or corporate interest controlled) media, and of course, that change will not be televised. A couple of people close to the problem will go home and drink too much to forget about it and that'll be the end of that.
People keep talking about how corporations are taking over from nations. The corporate presidents are proud to say that they're doing more to change the world than governments can anymore. I wonder when we're going to have that conversation again (after the 1780s) about the People and their right to self-govern. Nobody elected Erik Prince to represent us in our foreign policy. American is losing it's Americanness. It's becoming Old Europe all over again, with barons and kings.
Funny -- the barons and kings don't seem to have a problem with it. And they are controlling the media, so therefore, nobody has a problem with it.
Go "capitalism"!! Nobody even talks about how what the conservatives believe is kind of like capitalism really isn't capitalism. No-bid contracts, industry subsidies (you know, in the farming industries, where everybody's a rabid Republican), industry protections (like closing off the borders to Chinese imports), etc. Cronyism, not capitalism. Why don't we hear any "righties" complain about ANY of those things? Because they don't know the definition of capitalism. If these guys had to live in a pure capitalist economy (a fairy tale, by the way), they'd CRY.

Okay, I know this is a very disjointed, rambling post. I woke up in a bad mood and I don't have any energy drink in the house, so I have to go out to the store.
Do me a favor and ignore the whole thing.
-q

User avatar
Marie
Certified Fan
Posts: 32580
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: In front of my computer

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Marie » Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:05 am

Q, you're right about capitalism -- true capitalism -- being where it's at, and about what we have not being capitalism at all. If there were true competition, all the wealth wouldn't be migrating from the middle class up to the top 3% of the population.

Part of the problem was giving corporations all the same rights as individuals. In the country's early days, corporations were partly defined that way in law, but they had nowhere near the extremely literal definition as "people" that they enjoy today (for example, corporations weren't accorded the political freedom of speech they possess now). The analogy of a corporation as a "person" has been pushed to the point of ridiculousness, where no real person can compete because no real person has, simultaneously, all the civil rights and all the legal protections of a corporation!

As for KO's politics, I think what he has said is that it's okay for a journalist to have his own preferences regarding how the government should go about solving problems, but that those preferences don't determine how you cover a story. I was so glad that Moyers brought up sports in the context of how Keith regards his job, but disappointed that neither he nor KO mentioned the first important news story with which Keith was identified: the 2004 voting irregularity story.

People wondered why this good natured, mild-mannered reporter should have had such a bee in his bonnet about voting, of all things! Well, if they thought about it, it just made sense that a guy who'd been used to caring about juiced baseballs and juiced players all his life certainly wasn't going to allow the issue of juiced voting machines to go unexplored!

Or, more lately, juiced intelligence.

That's how he looks at news -- just like he looks at sports -- with the result that the things that would piss him off when he sees them happening in the games he loves also piss him off when he sees them happening in the country he loves.

-Marie-

User avatar
Marie
Certified Fan
Posts: 32580
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: In front of my computer

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Marie » Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:15 am

As for Matthews, Stanislavski's advice to his acting students -- "Love the art in yourself, rather than yourself in art" -- seems to have gone right out the window. To Chris, it's all about himself in news.

He's far and away his most engrossing story!

-Marie-

Quanlin

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby Quanlin » Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:56 pm

I don't think unadulterated capitalism is where it's at. I think regulated capitalism is where it's at.
But the people who think they like capitalism don't seem to raise a stink about the government doing all kinds of uncapitalistic things. They need to find a new word for what they want, because it's not capitalism.
-q

User avatar
CapitalL
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:51 pm
Location: Phoenix

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby CapitalL » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:03 pm

Quanlin,
I, too, wonder about the lack of outrage from the right as to how their party got hijacked by the neocons. I think few conservatives will break party ranks enough to point out the fact that their party no longer stands for the traditional platforms of small government and controlled government spending. The exteme religious right has taken over and now it is a party that focuses only on so-called "values" and international policing in the form of saber-rattling. It's the God and Guns party, now. Look at how well Huckabee is doing primarily on those two issues (although in his case Guns means more NRA than Iraq).

Although I wouldn't argue too much about it being okay if you call KO partisan, but is he really? He's outraged, not because Bush is a Republican but because he's tried to destroy everything good about this country. He sometimes rails against the Dems, too, for good reason. I'll always remember what a pathetic statement it made about Dems when ancient Robert Byrd was the only Senator with big enough cahones to speak at length against the Senate's decision to let Bush go to war. I think we need a third party, perhaps called the Sanity Party - we need more of that in government.

User avatar
ShadowCell
Posts: 1309
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 6:27 pm
Location: Somewhere
Contact:

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby ShadowCell » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:27 pm

Because the neocons won?

I think that is why the right doesn't really seem to mind how the neocons grabbed the helm. They, along with the religious right, put the Republicans in power in some way for twelve years.
Right-wing trolls who have tried to physically threaten me on the Internet: 3

User avatar
TimidOne
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:42 am
Location: The OC

Re: Matthews v KO feud?

Postby TimidOne » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:07 pm

ShadowCell wrote:Because the neocons won?

I think that is why the right doesn't really seem to mind how the neocons grabbed the helm. They, along with the religious right, put the Republicans in power in some way for twelve years.


Speaking of NeoCons... Did you see that William Kristol has lost his job at Time?


Wednesday, Dec 19

Time Magazine I: Krauthammer And Kristol Are Outta Here

Conservative columnists William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer are both leaving Time magazine, according to the Observer. Neither had their contracts renewed. The publication, which has long had a reputation of slanting towards the right (going way back to founder Henry Luce's ties to the Republican Party and up to the present, according to some), is ultimately motivated by the almighty dollar. That's why Time recently redesigned their magazine. It's also why the magazine keeps employing much-maligned humorist Joel Stein — people read him (and, in the red states, even like him).

For Time, it appears that giving two of the biggest supporters of the Iraq War in the media just wasn't a smart decision. Krauthammer told the Observer, when asked why he didn't renew his contract: "It's a hypothetical that didn't arise."

No worries about either of them having career problems any time soon as a result, though... Krauthammer still has his Washington Post column and Kristol still has that crazy Weekly Standard of his.


http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/m ... _73373.asp
"These times require more than a good soldier, they require a wise leader"
Senator Joe Biden - 8/23/08
Image


Return to “2007”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests