There are times when I hate being a media analyst, for I am often forced to view and review television reports and newspaper articles that literally make me nauseated while undermining my faith in journalists as a whole as well as my fellow citizens.
The following video is a perfect example, a virtual piece of detritus that unfortunately is likely to offend so many viewers on so many levels that it's almost unimaginable a highly-regarded American journalist was responsible for its content.
Alas, Bill Moyers was at it again Friday evening closing out his Bill Moyers Journal program on PBS with a monologue about President George W. Bush and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove that is guaranteed to sicken you as much as it did me.
In fact, my disgust over this abomination is so great that I care not to excerpt or highlight any of its contents in fear of ruining my weekend. As such, what follows is a partial transcript of this disgraceful refuse for your reading displeasure (video available here, h/t NBer mattm):
What struck me about my fellow Texan Karl Rove was that he knew how to win elections as if they were divine interventions. You may think God summoned Billy Graham to Florida on the eve of the 2000 election to endorse George W. Bush just in the nick of time, but if it did happen that way, the Good Lord was speaking in a Texas accent.Karl Rove figured out a long time ago that the way to take an intellectually incurious, draft-averse, naughty playboy in a flight jacket with chewing tobacco in his back pocket and make him governor of Texas, was to sell him as God's anointed in a state where preachers and televangelists outnumber even oil derricks and jack rabbits. Using church pews as precincts, Rove turned religion into a weapon of political combat -- a battering ram, aimed at the devil's minions. Especially at gay people. It's so easy, as Karl knew, to scapegoat people you outnumber. And if God is love, as rumor has it, Rove knew in politics to bet on fear and loathing. Never mind that in stroking the basest bigotry of true believers you coarsen both politics and religion.
At the same time he was recruiting an army of the Lord for the born-again Bush, Rove was also shaking down corporations for campaign cash. Crony capitalism became a biblical injunction. Greed and God won four elections in a row -- twice in the Lone Star state and twice again in the nation at large. But the result has been to leave Texas under the thumb of big money with huge holes ripped in its social contract, and the U.S. government in shambles -- paralyzed, polarized, and mired in war, debt and corruption. Rove himself is deeply enmeshed in some of the scandals now being investigated, including those missing emails that could tell us who turned the Attorney General of the United States into a partisan sock puppet.
Rove is riding out of Dodge City as the posse rides in.
At his press conference this week he asked God to bless the President and the country, even as reports were circulating that he himself had confessed to friends his own agnosticism. He wished he could believe, but he cannot. That kind of intellectual honesty is to be admired, but you have to wonder how all those folks on the Christian right must feel discovering they were used for partisan reasons by a skeptic, a secular manipulator.
On his last play of the game all Karl Rove had to offer them was a Hail Mary pass, while telling himself there's no one there to catch it.
How utterly disgraceful. Yet, maybe more sick-making is the number of Americans that applaud such vitriol aimed at their fellow citizens.
Forgive me, but I need to go hug my children, and remind myself that not everybody in this country supports this kind of anti-American propaganda.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Minor point here, Noel....
August 18, 2007 - 15:48 ET by Winger55"Nauseous" means "the ability to nauseate." Therefore, Moyers is nauseous, and you are nauseated. As am I after reading that. What a bitter old socialist he is.
Winger
August 18, 2007 - 16:01 ET by Noel SheppardWinger,
You are correct, and pointed out a distinction I was never aware of. In reality, either are acceptable even though the correct word in this sentence is as you said "nauseated." Thanks for the heads-up. ns
Besides Bill Moyers idiot opinion
August 19, 2007 - 23:48 ET by SportPoliticscausing the queasy feeling, if you look again, you might notice the camera is slowly moving to the right, and the backround behind the babbling loon lefty opinion blabberer is moving left, while apparently the loon swivels or their entire platform spins. (pun intended) Made me queasy - their camerawork.
So, 5 minutes or so of flaplipped lib spewing his personal opinion in a contest with Keith Olbermann, and every other babbling lib moron, as to whom can create the largest fantasy set of lies and characterizations and piece them together into a giant hatefest spew while pretending to be "reporting the truth".
Your personal opinions and adjective descriptions doused with your bushhate doesn't make a believer out of me.
I guess the libs function on their "sometime prior established and believed facts" ( that of course we're merely characterizations then as now ) , and have entered the long, long period where all they have to do is repeat their "established accusations" while pretending everyone else already "knows they are true". Therefore the debate is over, and now just the searing slander must be issued with all the creativity and flair the lib can summon.
}}---> Actually
August 18, 2007 - 16:02 ET by Cool ArrowAlthough you are technically correct, the term "nauseous" has in recent years been accepted by dictionaries as both adverb and adjective.
In other news, the terms regardless and irregardless are accepted as synonyms.
Both capitulations were made as a result of the dumbing down of the language.
Another misappropriated phrase is "I could care less" when trying to convey one really could not care less.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Cool, You hit two of my
August 18, 2007 - 16:12 ET by BlondeCool,
You hit two of my hot button words/phrases in one post. Irregardless (sheesh!) and I could care less.
Another one is practical instead of practicable.
I'd not heard there was a difference between nauseous and nauseated, so I learned another good one today, thanks Winger.
}}---> Flustrated
August 18, 2007 - 16:20 ET by Cool ArrowNow in a dictionary near you. Flustrated: Combination of two synonyms to mean frustrated and flustered (still working on what the difference between them is).
Never did understand why flammable and inflammable mean the same thing.
Combustible and incombustible, however, are antonyms.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
definitions
August 20, 2007 - 00:50 ET by SportPoliticsFlustrated came from a not too bright liberal wacko, believe me, I know.
flustered=rattled
frustrated=unsuccessful and disappointed
Hence the liberal expressed in idiocy their lifelong predicament:
A rattled and disappointed loser.
Libs are always "flustrated". Their lisping idiocy helped them "urbanize" the word for the masses.
As for the inflammable, another bungling idiot of what sort I do not know, in their self percieved wisdom commented that such a liquid(generally the reference) or object would "burst in flames" .
Hence someone concluded inflammable.
Hang in there Noel Bill,
August 18, 2007 - 15:56 ET by general companyHang in there Noel
Bill, Rove didnt win those elections, the idiots you liberals put up to run against him did.
U.S. government in shambles -- paralyzed, polarized, and mired in war, debt and corruption
Their are more then a few of us who see this as a Demecrat problem you idiot
The genius
August 18, 2007 - 16:20 ET by NortonPeteDon't let Moyers ruin your weekend, you are the only one who watched him so if you don't say anything nobody will know.
I'm sure its been said many times by smarter people than me but I think letting the Democrats have power during the last two years of GWB term might be a great thing for the next Presidential election.
Congress now has the lowest rating......hmmm.... that evil genius..
Working for Lyndon Johnson
August 18, 2007 - 16:20 ET by zhombreWorking for Lyndon Johnson way back when Moyers midwived the birth of the attack ad and divisive politics in 1964 campaign against Barry Goldwater. Now Moyers has lived long enough and spouted enough liberal pieties and bristled with sufficient self righteous indignation that he's an icon to the lefties, absolutely peerless and incorruptible in their eyes. I suppose one has to admit that is some kind of triumph, to have outlived one's own stink.
Bitter?
August 18, 2007 - 16:25 ET by MCPO AirdaleMoyer is the most bitter of partisans. What really gets my goat is that his personal wealth from spouting socialist vitriol comes from the taxpayer. He, and his son, have fed at the PBS/NPR trough for far too long.
You don't suppose...
August 19, 2007 - 15:19 ET by PKYou don't suppose that PBS/NPR has been recieving enough static in the form of telephone calls, emails, calls to congressmen etc. etc. etc. that they are starting to get into bms' knickers seriously enough that he is having to think about retirement rather than being forced out?
as i remember he was a prominent face on one of the MSM during the nam situation and had to leave because of some kind of "problem".
C
Perhaps Bill Moyers could
August 18, 2007 - 16:21 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsPerhaps Bill Moyers could show the whole world how 'progressive' he is by performing a 'Monica' on Bill Clinton.
Then again, maybe not.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
That job's already taken (by
August 18, 2007 - 17:51 ET by Del DolemonteThat job's already taken (by Eleanor Rodham Clift)
Del, I thought Eleanor Rodham Clift was servicing Hillary.
August 19, 2007 - 00:21 ET by Dave RBut I could be wrong.
Idealogue Moyers is
August 18, 2007 - 16:23 ET by Trix RabbitIdealogue Moyers is enthralled by the portrait of his own moral and intellectual righteousness. He slanders those of whom he disapproves in the most hysterical and bone-headed terms while maintaining a façade of injured morality.
He rants, he raves, he gets his knickers in a knot about conservatives yet fails to understand that he is one of the most flagrant example of partisan, anti-religious, and ideological journalism that has ever existed.
Liberal: a power worshipper without power. George Orwell
}}---> And all that
August 18, 2007 - 16:27 ET by Cool ArrowAnd all that on the taxpayers dime.
Can't we just sell the PBS bandwidth to Soros and get Moyers out of my pocket? I mean the guy keeps trying to fiddle with my change.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
I Second those sentiments
August 18, 2007 - 19:31 ET by bigtimerI Second those sentiments Cool.
I am sick and tired of PBS...plus way past sick and tired of the filth and tripe the loony-bird leftist Moyers always spews out...
Enough already.
PBS
August 18, 2007 - 16:46 ET by DingbatYour tax dollars paid for that diatribe. Would the fairness doctrine apply to PBS? Oh, silly me.
Same old, same
August 18, 2007 - 18:04 ET by SMGalbraithSame old, same old....
Reverend Moyers (and he is an ordained Baptist minister, remember) has been offering this morality tale of good-vs-evil for more than 30 years (longer if one includes his tenure as LBJ's press secretary). Long before Limbaugh and talk radio destroyed the glory days of comity and equanimity in American political discourse (or so goes the myth), Moyers was disseminating this vitriole. And as has been documented, he's gotten quite rich doing so.
[In fact, if one wants to trace an accurate history, Limbaugh and talk radio emerged in response to the Moyer's types that dominated the news media. I'll not defend much of the harsh rhetoric from Limbaugh et al.; but let's get our history correct.]
Moyers is the archetypical Southern 60's liberal - liberal arrogance squared - who still sees issues through that prism. On one side, the forces of progressive values and justice; on the other, reactionary elements corrupting American and blocking social justice. While the political Right (mostly) views liberals as bleeding heart do-gooders - usually well-intentioned but often misguided - the left views conservatives as cruel opponents of programs and legislation that will create a truly just and fair country. In this view, if only the evil opponents could somehow be defeated, an end to poverty and racism and injustice (and other ills) could be attained.
One side views their opponents as miguided do-gooders while the other see its opponents as fundamentally evil defenders of an unjust order.
Not much chance of reaching common ground with people holding this worldview.
SMG
Repeat of my open thread post
August 18, 2007 - 17:30 ET by mattmDid you hear Bill Moyers whining tirade against Karl Rove on PBS? He ends up with this: "you have to wonder how all those folks on the Christian right must feel discovering they were used for partisan reasons by a secular skeptic, a manipulator."
First of all Billy, I wonder how all those 1960's libs felt when they were manipulated into voting for Johnson because you scared the voters into thinking Goldwater would start a nuclear war, and then to see the Vietnam war escalated by the same Johnson who justified it based on the Gulf of Tonkin lie.
Second, we on the mis-named Christian Right didn't vote for Rove, we voted for Bush.
Thirdly, how can you justify your partisan views being supported by government dollars?
You, sir, are the manipulator!
This alone is
August 18, 2007 - 17:34 ET by motherbeltThis alone is priceless:
you have to wonder how all those folks on the Christian right must feel
discovering they were used for partisan reasons by a skeptic, a secular
manipulator.
Talk about manipulation:
It was the liberals who started the "religious wars" by attacking people of faith, claiming that they could not make legal judgments because their religious beliefs would get in the way; attempting to frighten voters into believing that a bible-based, evolution-believing, abortion-banning, gay-murdering theocracy was just a few votes away.
The way liberals like Moyers engage in "projection" just nauseates me. It is nauseating, it nauseates me, and makes me nauseous.
Did I cover them all? LOL
What makes Billy Joe Moyers
August 18, 2007 - 17:54 ET by Del DolemonteWhat makes Billy Joe Moyers even more of a hypocrite is that he was once a minister himself. The man must have massive guilt issues...
Who was that, that said in
August 18, 2007 - 23:21 ET by motherbeltWho was that, that said in 2002, "and if you like God in government, get ready for the Rapture!"?
Now WHO was it, Mr. Moyers, that made religion a political weapon?
that good ol liberal logic...not!
August 20, 2007 - 01:18 ET by SportPolitics" you have to wonder how all those folks on the Christian right must feel "
No, I don't have to wonder how they must feel, but you libs are so concerned about "feelings", I'm sure you're hoping they feel "terrible"...in fact that is what you have tried to imply, isn't it ? That was a really low and mean cheap shot, but I'm sure you meant every nasty word of it, and I'm sure you said it, to try to make yourself "feel good" about "your enemies" "pain", that you hope you inflict, with your follow up "revelation" on Rove.
"discovering they were used for partisan reasons"
The "Christian right" are partisans, you moron Moyers - your label stupid-, so if they are being "used" in support of their partisan agendas, they are VERY HAPPY about that, you idiot.
" by a skeptic "
I'm sure they enjoyed evangelizing to their campaign plan hero for the many years he made them winners.
" , a secular
manipulator. "
Hmm, a secular person is the kind you have said is the "perfect government type" to "keep Church and State" separated. You were beaten by your own idea of "perfect". Not once, not twice, but FOUR times in a row. That kind of manipulation is certain to make all those Christian right people CHEER with joy.
How does that make you feel ? You idiot! Like a LOSER ?
LOL
______________________________________
I think that's why Moyers presents his spew in his slow and painfully morosed sort of way, calmly and in a dreary monotone he rambles onward toward it's conclusion, never up or down but just slowly trapsing along..... like he is in severe inner pain, and for the life of him he has to make sure he twists reality 180 degrees to explain to himself why he and his party is such a pathetic failure crushed by the gigantically successful ROVIAN MACHINE.
Relax, comply, it's your tax dollars at work.
August 18, 2007 - 18:52 ET by upcountrywaterpbs it's just the middle of the road, don't u know!
Entitlement over infrastructure every SINGLE time.
"Anti-American"?
August 18, 2007 - 19:04 ET by takingmyconstitutionalMr. Sheppard says, that after watching Bill Moyers' piece, he needs to remind himself "that not everybody in this country supports this kind of anti-American propaganda."
Sorry, Mr. Sheppard. It is not enough to simply label people who happen to disagree with you as "anti-American." Many patriotic citizens besides Bill Moyers have looked at the damage caused to their country by George Bush and Karl Rove and cried for their country. I think Moyers did an excellent job of describing some of the reasons why.
Now perhaps you can tell us why you disagree with Moyers. And perhaps you can do so without falling back on the totalitarian defense---i.e., that everyone who disagrees with you is an enemy of the state.
Sniff Sniff
August 18, 2007 - 19:23 ET by Noel SheppardWhat's that disgusting smell?
Oh. TMC took another constitutional.
Would somebody light a book of matches please? ns
Bad Noel
August 18, 2007 - 19:25 ET by BlondeBad Noel, bad, bad Noel!
That post deserved a beverage warning. :D
B
August 18, 2007 - 19:31 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Well, you do really that's all he does. I haven't actually seen him respond to any posters here. What he does every few days is drop a little...detritus in the random thread, and run away.
As such, it's fairly obvious that his SN describes him and his actions perfectly. When he comes, he's taking a constitutional. ns
Noel
August 18, 2007 - 19:35 ET by BlondePrecisely.
I've come up with my own term for these annoying trollers......turdlers.
And you're right, his SN does describe him perfectly....so perhaps this turdler is at least honest about his intention here. (S)hit & run.
Sorry, I couldnt' resist that one. You can send me to my room now.
B
August 18, 2007 - 19:41 ET by Noel SheppardExactly. S***-and-run! I had this guy pegged from his first comment.
But, you're right. At least he's not hiding his intentions. I just wish he'd leave a can of Lysol when he gets off the pot. :-)
Noel, You're killing me
August 18, 2007 - 19:47 ET by BlondeSeriously, the next time one of the turdlers show up, I'm going to post "Lysol Alert".
No need to send the paramedics....yet. Are you into the micro-brews this afternoon, N?
B
August 18, 2007 - 19:52 ET by Noel SheppardB,
No. No beer yet. I'm waiting to take my son out for a final dinner before he heads back to college. Just us. Haven't been to dinner with just my son since I dropped him off in Lincoln a year ago. So, this is going to be very enjoyable. He even cancelled a date to go out with his dad. Imagine that. ns
Wow! That says alot about
August 18, 2007 - 19:57 ET by BlondeWow! That says alot about you as a dad, N.
Have fun.
I agree
August 18, 2007 - 20:00 ET by Timothy HI agree completely.
- Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints -
Must Be Proud.
August 18, 2007 - 19:57 ET by Timothy HSounds like a good boy, Noel. You must be proud.
- Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints -
Noel
August 18, 2007 - 19:59 ET by balboaYour kid's a Husker?
For TMC, NB needs to install an industrial-strength fart sucker.
August 19, 2007 - 01:03 ET by Dave RThe Al Bundy De-luxe version, the kind that Tim Taylor would modify to 500cfm or so.
Probably suck the towels right off the rack.
Noel... ROFLMAO! Perfect
August 18, 2007 - 19:28 ET by bigtimerNoel...
ROFLMAO!
Perfect.
Hey Taking, I used to love
August 18, 2007 - 19:31 ET by tracheostomyHey Taking, I used to love Moyers. I used to think he really knew what he was talking about. Then I took speech and debate in college. I learned how to abuse rhetoric with the best of 'em and come across as intellectual without anything to hold me up.
Did you happen to notice Moyer's use of caricature-as-reality?
"intellectually incurious, draft-averse, naughty playboy in a flight jacket with chewing tobacco in his back pocket."
Note the super vague; subjective terms: "Intellectually incurious" for one. The guy is incredibly well-read on many deep topics, existentialist authors being just one example! But these details don't matter to Moyers, because the distortion is necessary to further his personal agenda.
"Draft averse"? You mean compared to Clinton? When did serving in the Reserves make you the same as someone who burned their draft card? Or are you arguing for the CBS Rather/Mapes fake scandal?
"Naughty playboy"? In what sense? In the sense that he personally admitted a drinking problem that he has since quit?
Are you blind to the out-of-control hyperbole here? ". . .where preachers and televangelists outnumber even oil derricks and jack rabbits."
That's just the second paragraph cited. Holy crap!
Did you note that Moyers continually makes liberal use of this same kind of broad subjectivity and "everybody knows" arguments? With a little clever exaggeration and his PBS two-step, you just accept what he says without considering the substance of his drawn-out editorializing.
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Noel Sheppard said no such
August 18, 2007 - 19:52 ET by Jack BauerNoel Sheppard said no such thing.
You're the one accusing people who support anti-American propaganda as being "un-American" and an "enemy of the state".
Way to go, Stalinist creep.
OK, tell us if you can
August 19, 2007 - 00:02 ET by Del DolemonteOK, tell us if you can defend Moyers on these two issues. Since both of them happened long before you were born, do dome research.
1. Moyers for many years was the right hand man for a Democrat named Lyndon Johnson who climbed into bed with the Halliburton firm in Texas in 1936, long before Dick Cheney was even hatched. His mentor/boss enriched himself from said firm for decades, including giving all sorts of no-bis contracts to the firm during the Vietnam War, where many times more American soldiers were asted than in "Bush's war".
2. I'm sure you would agree that politicians trying to dig up dirt on their opponents is nothing new, and to be expected. But if Moyer had been working for a Republican President as his Chief of Staff, would you have condoned him trying to pressure the head of the FBI to try and ferret out members of the opposition party because they had a certain sexual preference? Do some research, and you'll find Moyers mentioned.
Del, Wait a cotton
August 19, 2007 - 00:08 ET by BlondeDel,
Wait a cotton pickin' second.
You said "before Dick Cheney was even hatched".
I thought he was created by a dark lord of the Sith?
You've confused me now.
BTW.....the little turdler never replies (see my conversation with Noel, above). Just, um, you know.
Hi Blonde, no, I know he
August 19, 2007 - 00:14 ET by Del DolemonteHi Blonde, no, I know he won't respond, especially to "logic"
As for dark lords, see the Pat Leahey Batman pots on Open Thread. I always knew he was a villainous force.
Del, Leaky Leahey is a
August 19, 2007 - 00:31 ET by BlondeDel,
Leaky Leahey is a rather more sinister villian than my beloved Darth Vader ever was or shall be. Dick Cheney is the man!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
re-editOK, tell us if you
August 19, 2007 - 00:24 ET by Del Dolemontere-edit
OK, tell us if you can defend Moyers on these two issues. Since both of them happened long before you were born, do some research.
1. Moyers for many years was the right hand man for a Democrat named Lyndon Johnson who climbed into bed with the Halliburton firm in Texas in 1936, long before Dick Cheney was even hatched. His mentor/boss enriched himself from said firm for decades, including giving all sorts of no-bid contracts to the firm during the Vietnam War, where many times more American soldiers were wasted than in "Bush's war".
2. I'm sure you would agree that politicians trying to dig up dirt on their opponents is nothing new, and to be expected.
But if Moyers had been working for a Republican President as his left-hand man, would you have condoned him trying to pressure the head of the FBI to try and ferret out members of the opposition party because they had a certain sexual preference? Do some research, and you'll find Moyers mentioned.
Hi, everyone. This is my
August 18, 2007 - 19:17 ET by Felicity RandHi, everyone. This is my first post here.
Isn't it a fact that the Democrats actually garner more Christians than Republicans, because of African-Americans being regular church-goers? It thought I heard this after the 2004 election. I could be wrong. Of course it's alright for their candidates to campaign in churches.
Moyers--surprise surprise--gives no examples re: the Bush camp's "forcing" religion into our lives/society.
Howdy Howdy FR.... Either
August 18, 2007 - 19:27 ET by bigtimerHowdy Howdy FR....
Either way as to how many votes of the Christians either party garners...
The left have always been hypocrites ...while politikin' in the black churches....
Never get criticized either.
Enjoy yourself here....
Warning...can be addictive at times...LOL.
You can fool most
August 18, 2007 - 19:39 ET by tracheostomyYou can fool most Christians into voting for you as long as you use the correct catchwords at the right time (faith, morals, God, values, and the big JC if you really got a pair).
Other than that, you can get 'em easy just as long as they don't ask about your details of faith or about your own systematic theology.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Noel
August 18, 2007 - 19:52 ET by balboaI'm not sure I understand why you're so upset about this. Is it because it's a cynical view of Rove? And do you want to hug your kids after one of Coulter's gems aimed at her "fellow citizens"?
Leave it to you
August 18, 2007 - 19:59 ET by bigtimerLeave it to you boa...
You always never seem to understand anything anymore.
....too much sun?
Perhaps. If Moyers was
August 18, 2007 - 20:06 ET by balboaPerhaps. If Moyers was eviscerating Mother Theresa or Gandhi or Joe DiMaggio, then I could understand the outrage.
Okay Bal, your explanation
August 18, 2007 - 20:30 ET by tracheostomyOkay Bal, your explanation in a nutshell would be that Coulter could at least include a bunch of footnoted citations to support her polemic, but I don't believe that Moyers could.
Furthermore, both Moyers' and Coulter's given job titles would be different ("polemicist pundit" vs. "investigative journalist"), even though they appear the same.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Breaking - Moyers removes entrails of Rove
August 18, 2007 - 20:53 ET by acumen"If Moyers was eviscerating Mother Theresa or Gandhi or Joe DiMaggio, then I could understand the outrage."
As well you should Bal. But I didn't realize Moyers was removing the entrails of Rove. How did the MSM miss that?
Maybe you meant belittling, defaming, criticizing, denigrating, maligning, ridiculing, discrediting, vilifying or even slamming. But "eviscerating"?
However; your apparent struggle with grasping the english language would explain your lack of understanding of just why Moyers piece is so upsetting to most here. Possibly you were homeschooled by the homeless so best not blame your shortcoming on the public school system. But even you should understand our tax dollars could be better spent on far more important matters than providing a forum for a partisan hack like Moyers to spew his shameful display of character assassination of public servants he happens to disagree with.
e·vis·cer·ate, -at·ed, -at·ing, adjective –verb (used with object)
1.
to remove the entrails from; disembowel: to eviscerate a chicken.
2.
to deprive of vital or essential parts: The censors eviscerated the book to make it inoffensive to the leaders of the party.
3.
Surgery. to remove the contents of (a body organ).
Obviously I meant
August 18, 2007 - 21:11 ET by balboaObviously I meant eviscerate figuratively, acumen.
And I've been trying to suss out if Noel is upset simply because it's one of the right's favs being belittled, defamed, criticized, maligned, ridiculed, discredited, villified, slammed, etc., as if Rove is beyond reproach.
Gawd you're a moron bal
August 20, 2007 - 02:18 ET by SportPoliticsI'm so happy my subject shows up here.
Last time anyone said "suss out", it was a traitorous little piece of crap, a "b***" of the vampires in one of the Blade films, and his screen name was Scud, but he was called Skum, on purpose.
I think I'm happy with that characterization.
That should clear up any questions.
B
August 18, 2007 - 20:27 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Well, when I first saw your questions, I took a look at the transcript, began cutting-and-pasting, and realized that I was just going to reprint virtually the entire thing.
To begin with, referring to a twice-elected sitting president as "an intellectually incurious, draft-averse, naughty playboy in a flight jacket with chewing tobacco in his back pocket" is disgraceful:
This is disgusting, and disingenuous. Gays in the military and the Defense of Marriage Act were Clinton issues. In fact, DOMA passed the Senate 85-14 in September 1996 after receiving similarly huge bipartisan support in the House months earlier. As such, was the debate concerning homosexuality in this nation created by Karl Rove? Not even close.
Rove's a bigot? Really? Tell me how? Furthermore, the bashing of this president by Democrat members of Congress since virtually the day he was inaugurated has been BY FAR the worst by any Party since I was born.
Idiots like Moyers continue to blame the caustic tone of politics in Washington on the Bush White House while they themselves heap vitriol and hate upon all those in it and ignore years of disgraceful behavior by Democrats towards this president. Don't you recognize the hypocrisy here?
Our government is paralyzed? Nonsense.
Our government is polarized? Has been since Watergate occurred 34 years ago. As such, blaming this polarization on Bush and/or the Republicans is nonsense.
Mired in war? Maybe, but one voted on by huge bipartisan majorities in both chambers of Congress.
Mired in debt? Well, the debt began to pile up in the '30s, and hasn't declined once since 1960. As such, blaming this debt on Bush is absurd. Totally.
Mired in corruption? Moyers like the rest of his ilk refuses to acknowledge that the most corrupt politician in America is Jack Murtha, and that this has been the case for decades. Furthermore, the Democrats lost Congress in 1994 due to their own corruption. As such, blaming corruption in Congress on Republicans is nonsense.
I'm sorry, B, but the lies and misrepresentations here by Moyers would be exposed and thoroughly torn apart in a debate and in a court of law. Frankly, if he made such statements under oath, he'd be guilty of perjury.
As for Ann Coulter, does she have her own television show paid for with your tax dollars wherein she gets to make such statements? No. She is an author whose opinions largely have to be purchased by those interested in reading them, and are NEVER foisted upon folks in a weekly program on PBS.
As such, when she gets her own television program, I think you've got a point. But, when people immediately use Coulter as a counter argument for the behavior of news anchors and television hosts who are supposed to be impartial disseminators of news, I believe them to be comparing apples to oranges.
Fair enough? ns
Whoa...lots going on
August 18, 2007 - 20:42 ET by balboaWhoa...lots going on here.
"an intellectually incurious, draft-averse, naughty playboy in a flight jacket with chewing tobacco in his back pocket."
Aren't all these things true? (I don't know about the "draft-averse" part, though.)
If Coulter said what she said on her own PBS show, would you be "outraged" then? And Moyers isn't a news anchor, is he? He's a journalist doing an editorial, right?
Balboa
August 18, 2007 - 20:57 ET by Noel SheppardB,
He's a television host of a news journal, right? So, there should be some level of impartiality, not just Republican bashing, especially if my tax dollars are paying for it. Also, his statements should approach accuracy. As I pointed out, he doesn't even seem to try.
If Coulter had such a program on PBS, I would only be outraged if all the other liberal nonsense was removed, and PBS was trying to represent itself as an impartial disseminator of news. However, given the current amount of liberally biased crap on PBS, a program by a conservative pundit wouldn't offend me in the least. Actually, I'd welcome it with open arms.
See, B, the difference here is that Ann Coulter doesn't pretend to be impartial. She wears her politics all over her sleeves. By contrast, Moyers believes himself to be presenting an unbiased view. This is where the lie becomes dangerous, because a good percentage of folks don't know what his predispositions are, and will buy what he's presenting as a factual representation.
By contrast, with Coulter, she's not trying to hide her leanings is she? As a result, regardless of how nasty the message might be at times, at least it's not disguised as anything other than her conservative views. Can you say the same for Moyers, or Olbermann, or Matthews, or Blitzer, or Couric, or Williams, or Gibson, or Schieffer, or Stephanopoulos?
Hardly. And, that's the point. If these folks would just come out and admit their predilections, and let people know when they bash the president or Republicans that they are Democrats, then they'd be as honest as Coulter is with her views. Instead, they hide their political persuasions like a gambler does his cards pretending to be impartial disseminators of facts when indeed nothing could be further from the truth.
Fair enough? ns
Fair enough. Perhaps
August 18, 2007 - 21:06 ET by balboaFair enough.
Perhaps Moyers believes he's being impartial. I know, I'm nuts. But I'm just sayin'.
Bal
August 18, 2007 - 22:52 ET by Noel SheppardB,
I've only been writing professionally for two plus years, and I know I'm conservatively biased. Do you think anyone that's been in the industry as long as Moyers doesn't understand his/her predilections? Honestly? Do you know what your biases are, or need to be told them?
It's the blatant dishonesty in all this that should anger you as much as me. It's okay to be biased. We're all biased. Everybody. Just don't pretend you're not while you're exclusively and mercilessly bashing one side of the aisle every possible opportunity as you get paid for being a so-called journalist. That's what's really insulting.
You know, when I click on National Review or the Weekly Standard, I know I'm getting conservative opinions, and the folks there express their leanings with pride. By contrast, the folks on "your" side all feign impartiality as they espouse exclusively liberal positions.
Don't you find that an insult to your intelligence? Do the people on the right who you despise pretend to be impartial, or wear their conservatism proudly on their sleeves for all to see? If the answer is the latter, then isn't it really the liberal journalists who should be held in the lowest esteem regardless of how much you agree with their views?
Think about it. ns
I understand what you're
August 18, 2007 - 23:18 ET by balboaI understand what you're saying, and I will admit it is annoying when I see a Fox News interview with a Republican politician or appointee that's just a puffy, slobbering suck-up job. But then I chuckle and say "Oh Fox!"
But wait a minute babbling boa
August 20, 2007 - 02:41 ET by SportPoliticsMaybe you're nuts, and they think they're unbiased on Fox, ya know, just like you said BM maybe thinks he is, then it's ok, like you implied. Right dingy-do-gooder ?
Howsa bout you keeping your own insanity at the ready for both sides ? Sound too complicated for your twisted, warped, lunatic inspired smart aleck ideations ? Whoa, a lot there, huh.
So you get annoyed at Fox, but you were trying to "suss out" what annoyed NS.
Gosh bal. Lies or pure stupidity, take your pick. Maybe your insanity causes immense denial ?
Does NS need to say, now that you have yakked concerning your Fox reaction, "Oh, PBS." then chuckle ? Does that make it all good for baba the baby ?
Look, you're so busted again, you might as well not even reply, unless it's something so left wing and so stupid and banal that it will be simply more of same, which of course is all you are capable of anyway, right ?
I guess you win. I reply to your smart aleck stupidity, and for the life of me, I can't imagine you are that dumb, but somehow, with every line you type that follows, I'm reconvinced.
So, after NS busted your Coulter whine, you sauntered off to the Fox fabled left wing reaction, yet still that negates two of your prior stupidities, the one where you hoped to "suss out" NS's reaction, and another I could care less about remembering again at this point.
Really, tell me, are you that stupid, or are you just certain that being a rejected jester pushing buttons is your lifetime calling ? I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt but neither one of those scenarios does that. Is that annoying ? I guess you should just chuckle, then.
Bal--for what it's worth...
August 19, 2007 - 13:05 ET by Andrew H.Bal--for what it's worth... every time a media personality uses "evangelical" as if being one is a plague on the nation, I feel as if I'm part of a burdened minority. He seems to always put us down for being who we are and believing in something more important than ourselves. I am tired of it and every time one of these people begin that way, I tune him/her out because I already know if they oversimplify and distort this element, than everything that comes after is likely to be as false.
And to think we are forced to pay this turd is an insult and very frustrating.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
Liberals think they are the
August 21, 2007 - 10:10 ET by pbanks7Liberals think they are the enlightened ones. Therefore an evangelical is an ignorant apostate. Liberals worship - Liberalism.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
"If Coulter said what she
August 18, 2007 - 23:06 ET by contrary"If Coulter said what she said on her own PBS show, would you be "outraged" then? And Moyers isn't a news anchor, is he? He's a journalist doing an editorial, right?"
Just a journalist doing an editorial? So you would be okay with Jack Cafferty doing an "editorial" on say, Barack Obama, calling him a no good, thieving, corrupt, blah blah, blah without any basis in fact? When will the public stop viewing and supporting journalist who defame and libel others in the guise of promoting awareness of the issues.
Further, I would never support Ann Coulter any more than Bill Moyers on a public television show as Ann is in the business for entertainment and money, and Bill is trying to be relevant again and will say anything to that effect.
Wow!
August 18, 2007 - 20:19 ET by c5thenI never realized how angry and jealous Moyers is of Born-again Evengelical Christians. He is absolutely flumoxed that religious people actually live their faith and vote their faith. He, as with all liberals, would much rather that religious people either don't vote or ignore their faith in any political event, much like the Clinton's do.
Moyers' latest manifesto is so ant-christain that it sounds as if it's written by an athiest. Oh wait, it is.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
Noel, I don't blame you
August 18, 2007 - 21:15 ET by jcrapes4Noel,
I don't blame you for only giving a partial transcript. What a load of manure.
Dividing and conquering Christians
August 18, 2007 - 22:08 ET by nkviking75"...but you have to wonder how all those folks on the Christian right must feel discovering they were used for partisan reasons by a skeptic, a secular manipulator."
It's one big, insulting stereotype betraying Moyer's bigotry. The Democrats are supposedly pursuing the Christian vote this time around after reading exit polls saying the Christian right made the difference in the last election. But the Democrats are not pursuing conservative Christians. They're trying to stir up liberal Christians, thus driving a wedge into Christianity. Moyers and his ilk get more dispicable every day.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
the christian right
August 18, 2007 - 22:21 ET bymost of whom probally think that the repubs have not fully embraced their positions also probally think that the dems would be even worse: most likely feel Moyers is an idiot
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Yup, they think
August 21, 2007 - 10:14 ET by pbanks7Yup, they think conservative Christians are as phony as themselves. They're projecting yet again. Like my uncle Jim said (once head of Right to Life in Port Huron), "There aren't any Democrats in Heaven."
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Moyers is just mad that his
August 18, 2007 - 23:59 ET by Jinx McHueMoyers is just mad that his "if you like God in government, get ready for the Rapture" prediction after the 2002 elections never came true.
Re Bill Moyers, who helped
August 19, 2007 - 00:21 ET by maggieqpublicRe Bill Moyers, who helped coin the anti-Goldwater slogan ''In your guts you know he's nuts,'' for Lyndon Johnson: ''Every time I see him, I get sick to my stomach and want to throw up.''
Noel, I cannot verify, but the above comment has been attributed to Senator Goldwater. If accurate, Moyers has a lengthy history of bringing on the queasy stomach.
Balboa wants to chat about Moyers’ targets, but Moyers, himself, is the real story. The common theme in the comments on this thread is “bitter”. Tack on “old man”, and the bio is complete.
Moyers--another example of
August 19, 2007 - 06:03 ET by Andrew H.Moyers--another example of our tax dollars at work.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
Repeat as neccessary...
August 20, 2007 - 07:16 ET by Sergeant ROCKReminds me of 1930's Germany. Repeat a lie often enough...
Just an observation..
August 19, 2007 - 07:22 ET by goldenthroatIs it my imagination or does Bill Moyers always look like he has a bad case of indigestion?
"Yeah, that's the ticket!" - Tommy Flanagan
takingmyconstitution said
August 19, 2007 - 09:53 ET by Johnnye B"Many patriotic citizens beside Bill Moyers have looked at the damage caused in their country by George Bush and Karl Rove and cried for their country."
What kind of crap is that? Damage caused by George Bush and Karl Rove? The damage I've seen done to this country hasn't been by the President or Karl Rove. Its been the democrats on capitol hill running around like the Keystone cops on crack crying " Bring the troops home", "We need to get out of Iraq." "Impeach everyone at the White House they're all guilty!", "Do we have anymore subpoenas?" Then of course the classic news footage of Harry "No Backbone" Reid standing there looking like some one had taken his lunch money after given him a wedgie saying,"Iraq is a failure". That's the damage being done to our country Mr. takingmyconstitution up the ass person. Get your information from somewhere else besides the tease for your local news at six and eleven.
Mr. Moyers, please explain
August 19, 2007 - 12:29 ET by drillanwrMr. Moyers, please explain for me, then, why it is the democrats who not only preach their politics from the pulpit of churches, but aim them specifically at black churches ... and the churches get away with it with the IRS????
What fear must be driving the G-dless socialist army these days ... to be invoking G-d into their diatribes.
}}---> Good ? drill
August 19, 2007 - 12:33 ET by Cool ArrowI've been a Texan forever and I don't know of an instance of Republicans taking over pulpits.
I do know of preachers who strictly interpret Scripture, though. Maybe that's what Moyers is talking about.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
lefties are phonies
August 19, 2007 - 14:43 ET by jondelwicheBM really lives up to his initials---as it describes: he is really a "turd"-ler.
Alas, he is simply an idiot extraordinaire!
My 2 cents worth:
who was more money lovin'?
Wasn't there a certain DNC chair and Clintonista who made millions on the fraud that was Global Crossing while the rest of us got fried?
And the stock market was awash in accounting fraud, starting with HealthSouth in 1996, but really massive in 1999 + 2000 (GBLX, GSTRF, Adelphia, , AOL, WCOM, Enrot, and on and on) that Rove and company had to clean up that megamess years later.
Imagine, a government now overseeing a legitimate 6 year bull market.....this is why BM is an idiot.
And when business is naughty (subprime), the Fed moves to shore it up asap, not leave it festering for the next administration.
Even now Clinton, gets 10 mil in "speaking fees," that somehow isn't a conflict with his wife running for President. Or greedy?
Flush the BM, now!
Thank goodness Noel has the courage to watch this crap. I can't.
don't give a rat's ass
August 20, 2007 - 02:04 ET by dcbatlledon't give a rat's ass whether Rove is a christian or not as long as he gets conservatives elected.
Isn't it just amazing dcbatle
August 20, 2007 - 03:33 ET by SportPoliticsthat at first, it's the right wing Christian invasion Moyers the instant satanist spews forth about, but then he coughs up spewing hatred for his claim that a secularist has corralled the win. Well, which is it for Moyers, his gyrating hatred for the Christian right, or his hatred for a secularist doing the same thing ?
These liberals don't even notice their own spewbabble, do they. He was too busy nuancing his fantasy about RWC's getting the "bamboozled 4 in a row win" from Rove, the "non-believer" according to bloviator.
I understand why NS was sickened by this piece of crap con artist Moyers, because Moyers took the very lowest road he could possibly imagine in concocting his fantasy about how RWC's "must feel", of course only after he stated that RCW's are hate mongerers doing the devil's work. Now, if that be true, then their secular "Brain" Rove in turn would be hailed as a tremendous asset by the same, if one were to expect liberal illogic to coincide with itself.
What a hack Moyers is. I frankly don't believe he is serious about what he says, and consider him using all he has to perpetrate his staged falsehoods to anyone he can hope to persuade. His construction is too complex and intertwined to be the mere insanities of a bungling conspiracy wacko. This guy Moyers is a plotting liar, well practiced and embracing his decietful cause with his leftist goals as a template.