On Sunday's The Chris Matthews Show, Norah O’Donnell claimed that Wolfowitz and Libby were "two of the angriest people" over the fact the US did not take out Saddam in the first Gulf War. The two then shared a laugh over Saddam's capture:

O'DONNELL: Two of the angriest people after the first Gulf War that we didn't go in and take out Saddam were Paul Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby. They've been holding that grudge ---

MATTHEWS: I thought Cheney was kind of upset too, wasn't he?

O'DONNELL: Yes, but not publicly. BUT Wolfowitz and Libby were.

MATTHEWS: Well they got their way didn't they?

O'DONNELL: HAHAHA! (Eerie laugh)

*****At the end of the show, Chris Matthews said the milestone of 2,000 dead troops is the reason why we should pull out of Iraq now.

I wish the morality of this was clear for all to see, that the loss of these happy faces makes by it self the case against this war.

DOWNLOAD .WMV

It has been reported that Daniel Crag, the actor slated to assume the role of James Bond, does not like guns.

And why do we need to know or even care about this? Frankly, those that are going to see the new James Bond movie are going to see the exploits of the famed super spy and are not going to see the film in order to support the radical politics of some messily actor few have even heard of before now.

James Earl Jones doesn’t wear a black cape, a space helmet, or breathe through a respirator either. I doubt Anthony Hopkins was really all that much into cannibalism. That’s why it’s called acting.

Since Mr. Crag has spoken out against 007’s propensity towards violence but not the spy’s tendency towards promiscuity, does that mean he has no problem with womanizing? Shouldn’t he be as uncomfortable being around such lustfully named dames as Pussie Galore, Honey Ryder, and Molly Warmflesh?

     From television to newspapers, the media have gone wild over oil companies’ profit reports this week, asking “how much is too much?” 

     That question alone demonstrated journalists’ omission of free market principles in their reporting. America’s free market allows the small businessman to become a large business if he is able. Once companies are publicly traded, millions of others share in the business’s profits. Yet, the media have pitted businesses against consumers, leaving out the fact that these large companies distribute dividends to millions of individuals.

     Covering oil companies’ profits, reporters operated on the assumption that there should be a profit ceiling for a business, and that anything above that would be unacceptable. They also attempted to whip up consumer “outrage,” even though it is consumer demand and oil scarcity that drive up prices – not an arbitrary decision by oil companies. Just a few highlights:

Bloggers are beginning to speculate about a new scandal that may effect New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Jon Corzine.  Enlighten-New Jersey writes of an allegedly damaging videotape that may surface within the next few days.  At this point the story involves nothing more than speculation.

Whether or not the story is true, the MSM's silence is significant.  Had this story related to a Republican, every morning talk show would be speculating about it. The MSM had Rove convicted of outing a spy more than two years ago. The same shows have been speculating about secret grand jury proceedings for weeks.

Every day, somebody at CNN picks a couple of video segments for their “Best of TV” section on their video page. From what I can tell, they can come from any of the various news categories CNN reports on such as world, business, politics, sports, health, etc. Of all the segments that they air during a given day and reproduce for their video page, typically only a couple are chosen for the “Best of TV” section.

On Friday, one of the three videos that made CNN’s “Best of TV” list was a 53 second clip of Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California) making a variety of accusations directed at the Bush administration on “Larry King Live.” In her rant, Boxer blamed Bush for the entire Plamegate affair, while claiming that the intent was “to punish a man's family because he told the truth about weapons of mass destruction.”

What follows is a full transcript of what CNN felt was the “Best of TV” last Friday, along with a video link.

In case NewsBusters readers needed reminding that liberal media bias exists outside the major TV networks/New York Times-Washington Post/newsmagazines iron triangle, a Knight Ridder News Service story this weekend did just that. As you'll see, the first few paragraphs of this overheated "news analysis" by Ron Hutcheson and Steve Thomma speak for themselves.

I should first note that Knight Ridder publishes 32 daily papers, some of them, such as the Miami Herald and Philadelphia Inquirer, in major markets, so Hutcheson and Thomma's piece probably found a large readership. That became even more likely when at least one non-KR paper, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, also picked up the article.

Here's the first part of the story:

For those of you who haven’t seen this morning’s “Meet the Press,” I highly recommend that you do so that you can see William Safire at his best, as well as some great incites from David Brooks. What follows are key statements from the two of them concerning Plamegate, and the events of the week. Though chronological in order, the numbered quotes are separate ideas that did not immediately follow one another: 

1.  MR. WILLIAM SAFIRE:  I think that was an excellent rundown and time line of a complicated series of accusations of a cover-up, but the most important single fact that emerged from the indictment is what was not in it.  This whole thing started as an investigation of the violation of a law.  And the law that was violated was you must not deliberately out an agent who is undercover.  And what the special counsel found is that law was not broken.

For those who have read or seen a lot of press reports since the announcement of the indictments against I. Lewis Libby on Friday, you have likely observed a growing number of quotes from White House “aides” and “insiders” concerning a state of panic and disarray within the administration. Yet, most of these reports do not give the names of the sources, and, instead, suggest that the informants wish to retain anonymity due to the current environment within the White House.

Newsweek’s Howard Fineman and Richard Wolffe wrote an article for the upcoming issue entitled, “Flying Blind,” wherein they asserted, “Team Bush is in turmoil.” To be sure, the title is quite appropriate, for not one of the eight “quotes” or paraphrases from White House “aides” identified the name of the source. In fact, two of these (the second and third bullets below) were referenced by George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "This Week" this morning:

In the upcoming issue of Newsweek, senior editor Jonathan Alter suggests that the tactics of the Bush administration have acted to lessen democracy in America.

In a piece entitled, “The Price of Loyalty is Incompetence,” Alter states, “The same president who seeks democracy, transparency and dissent in Iraq is irritated by it at home.” The premise of the article is that Bush and Company require rubberstamps of approval from all who work in the administration without any dissent if one wants to continue to be part of the team:

Washington Post reporter Kevin Merida writes in the Sunday Style section about an idea he finds odd: why would conservatives feel embattled when they have so much control in Washington? (First question: Kevin, did you read the front page? Have you read the media at all from, say, Camp Cindy or Hurricane Katrina forward?) Merida begins by being stunned at the conservative "beat-down" of Harriet Miers, and visits the American Spectator's annual dinner. "One might presume there would be more celebration over the accumulation of power." In mid-article, he offers new evidence, the MRC's annual Dishonor Awards banquet:

Is Julian Phillips of Fox & Friends Weekend undergoing a sea change? 

Readers of my entries here and at Free Republic know that over the months I've enjoyed skewering Julian when he has let his liberal slip show.  But this morning, Julian sang a very different song.

The context was a report that Bill Clinton yesterday urged his fellow Democrats to speak out bluntly on controversial issues, from abortion to religion.

Phillips had this to say:

"You can speak up and be tough but the question is, do you have any different solutions?  And I think that's the thing with the Democrats at this time.  They have to come up with some alternatives and I don't see that they have actually come up with anything yet." [emphasis added]

The hard-lefties at Fairness and Accuracy in Revolution, I mean Reporting (FAIR) have a new media advisory on Keith Olbermann's assertion to Al Franken that MSNBC brass complained that he had too many liberal guests. This was too much to bear for people still mourning the loss of the Donahue show on MSNBC. But -- get a load! -- FAIR then suggests its hero Olbermann DOESN'T count as a liberal on MSNBC! And neither does Chris Matthews:

If MSNBC management were genuinely worried about ideological balance, then the fact that the channel currently has two one-hour programs hosted by well-known conservatives (Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough) and none hosted by liberals would be of considerable concern. Or MSNBC could fret over Hardball's right-leaning panel discussion after a 2004 election debate...or the Hardball "town meeting" on the Iraq war that skewed heavily towards the pro-war side...The group Media Matters for America (10/21/05) recently documented that Hardball's discussions of the Plame Wilson leak case frequently skewed to the right, citing nine examples of panels that included only conservatives, or conservatives "balanced" by centrists; the group found only one case where a panel similarly leaned to the left.