The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Chuck Todd Called-out For Not Being A "Good Conservative"



Kyqywqaselv8vh9ixypr

It looks as if someone got their button pushed to the point of an explosion (On-air live mind you). 

It is well known Chuck Todd is a conservative, or he certainly appears so via the nature (choice and slant of stories), context and scope of his morning show news coverage. Nicole Wallace is a longstanding GOP operative who breathes, eats, drinks and lives "all things conservative." Wallace will argue her conservative point of view until she cracks a very infrequent smile; often after making her point she feels sells her argument. For Wallace smiles are as infrequent Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins (R) KA. who always within inches of Boehner at TV appearance. The Congresswoman always appears as if she has to run-off to the toilet for a Number Two and the press conference is trying her ability to hold it. She never ever shows a happy face.  Well, actually Cantor never actually smiles either. Why do these people never crack a smile?

I digress!

Nicole Wallace has one claim to fame we hold with a great deal of affinity. She was the first to speak out against John McCain's zany choice as a VP candidate in 2008. Her post-2008 campaign book may have led to production of the movie, "Game Change."

The image above seems to show Wallace has pushed Todd's buttons and he is showing her "the hand" and a related "Hold-on." Wallace's button push was in part do to a mis-speak via use of the word "indictment" and what appears disdain for Todd not standing up for a fellow conservative.

(Note: There have been no indictments in the on-going investigations of the Christie Administration).

We at the TPI rank Nicole Wallace alongside her predecessor Ari Fleischer. They are conservative tools who served an administration that literally placed the nation in a dire economic state and lowered the US on an international scale with governments in Iran or Syria. 

Joe Scarborough and his on-air cabal have been schmoozing around Chris Christie's "Bridgegate" and strong-arm influence around the northern most portions of the State of New Jersey. From Mika Brzezinski around the news set table (including Willie Geist and other highly compensated entertainers) to Joe himself, the theme has been "give Christie a break, back-off." Reports have it, the Morning Joe crew (Mika and Joe) have been at odds with the MSNBC evening news host who are rightfully and effectively investigating what could be a cover-up comparable to Watergate or Reagan's Iran-Contra. 

How about a little deductive reasoning. Let's consider MSNBC is chartered as a news network. Journalistic investigation is inherent and endemic to news coverage. Why shouldn't MSNBC real news hosts work in conjunction with print journalist in ferreting out details related to Bridgegate and possible misuse of Sandy (FEDERAL) relief funds? Do you recall how Nixon and his "hit-men" attacked the Washington Post and television media for investigating his cover up? The likeness is uncanny!

Is there value in Morning Joe (and company) daily conservative dialogue in support of Christie or is there value in the prospect of news media performing as news professionals? Is there value in people like Steve Kornakci's relevant revelations or Joe and Mika's "Abbey Road" (we are cool) black and white commercial segue shots?

Or better yet, you have this...



Reminds me of the hunting shot of Chris Wallace, Fox News, Karl Rove and others during others 2008 campaign. When media personalities schmooze they tend to fail in fair and objective reporting. 

I personally do not expect to see self-aggrandizing personalities when I tune-in for news. Maybe some people prefer entertainment as is often the case with conservative media (including the Morning Joe Show and Fox News).

Such personalities go here: 

Since the Morning Joe Show has taken up the Christie flag and on a daily basis waves it unabashedly, the following should not have surprised anyone.  

Check-out Wallace's dig against the very effective and probing Maddow. Maddow followed the Christie story well before any news show host. She and her team should be commended, yet Wallace uses the real news professional as an object of scorn and ridicule.  

Salon Dot Com....
Excerpt 
Scarborough set things in motion by asking MSNBC political analyst and NBC chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd to agree with his assertion that Christie had “a pretty good day yesterday.” 
Todd dismissively responded by saying, “OK … I mean, I guess … How do you define—” 
Todd continued to ramble on for a bit before he was interrupted by Wallace, who moaned, “Come on! Oh, my god!” 
Todd then figured out what he was trying to say: “I guess it’s a good day that — what? — that he didn’t get, that more indictments didn’t come in?”

“Oh, my god. Wait, wait — stop!” Wallace demanded. 
“Rachel’s not on till 9, Chuck,” she snarked, implying Todd was being a partisan Democrat, like MSNBC host Rachel Maddow.
At that point, Todd began backtracking and trying to assure Wallace that he, too, felt the media was being unfair to Christie. “We’re doing feeding frenzy on somebody who — we’re not actually like sitting back and — we’re overdoing it now,” Todd said. “I think everybody’s just trying to will him back into something.”

I have to again ask, "What will Joe, Mika and fellow Morning Joe 'facilitatiors" do if, or when, the Christie scandal reaches a conspirator or an operative who doesn't want to face criminal charges and decides to turn states evidence?

I suspect Maddow, Kornacki, Matthews, Sharpton and O'Donnell, will show class and avoid the stinging "I told you so!"

No comments :

Post a Comment