I had a lot of respect for Russert as he was, for the most part, somewhat balanced in his questioning/reporting. His presence on Sunday mornings displayed such a level of class in comparison to his rivals on the other networks.

I do, however, think he didn't use his strong position to control the venomous tone of MSNBC in the form of Matthews, Olberman, Shuster and Abrams. He was the head of this organization and had the responsibility to control the staffing and agenda of his news organization, but chose not to.

I also feel personally that he was complacent in covering up the facts of awareness by himself and his crew at MSNBC of knowledge of the Vallery Plame leaks. I don't believe for a minute that this was not a coverup designed to nail Libby, Cheney and Rove.

That said, my sincere condolences to Russert's family in this time of great loss. They can take comfort in the fact that he will be missed by both the left and the right. Hopefully NBC won't tarnish his image in their selection of a replacement.

If It's Sunday...It's Meet the Press...

Going to be very strange without seeing Tim there saying those very words...

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson

Russert was more than just the questions. It was also that he gave his guest a chance to answer. Now, of course, that was often the kiss of death - the guest got into even more trouble when he flailed around, trying to excuse himself. But if you had a good answer, Russert would let you give it. That was honest. Russert would ask a tough question, but he gave his guest a fair chance to answer.

Chris Wallace does that. Charlie Rose does that most of the time, although Rose often starts answering his own questions before the guest knows what's happening. Jim Lehrer used to do that. On the few occasions when Brit Hume interviews people, he does that. He gives you a chance to answer, and he listens to what you say. He's not just waiting for an opportunity to show that his guest is a liar or a hypocrite. He's actually listening, and he's willing to change his next question depending on how you answer the current question. How many other journalists do that? Absurdly few.

He wasn't perfect. Sometimes, I thought he pulled his punches with the Clintons, and now with Obama. He'd let EJ Dionne or Maureen Dowd and the intolerable Howard Dean whine on pointlessly. But when other journalists screwed up, I always chalked it up to them being bad journalists. When Russert did it, it was especially disappointing because in every other way, he was so good. He was the only journalist who could disappoint me, and that's actually a sign of my respect for him.

Saying Russert was sometimes fair and balanced is like saying that failed-ENRON CEO Kenneth Lay sometimes attended church. Or, an abortion clinic staff doctor volunteers his Fridays at a local urban health clinic where he treats colds and sprained ankles.

I take a more rigid view of someone violating their own professional ethics. Russert's show, I think, was different from Rush Limbaugh's, for instance. Limbaugh tells the world that he is an entertainer, a talker, a rhetoric-spouter; he said, "I'm deeply insulted if somebody calls me a journalist."

But Russert, on the other hand, hosted a "hard news" forum, wherein he, claiming to be an objective journalist, would ask pointed, meaningful questions of people currently in the news. I mean, he didn't have to keep a little note sheet saying, "Okay, I asked Cheney a tough question, now I have to ask Gore one hard question." But he was professional enough to keep the show on an even keel had he desired to do so.

Russert was different from, for instance, Keith Olbermann in that he was sane, he checked his facts, wasn't caught in blatant lies, and was polite to guests. But we know where his heart was...with the Democrats. And if a person rolls around in the pigpen, he'll get muddy just like the pigs. A woman who illegally uses her physical assets and skills to make money is called a prostitute; a journalist who uses his intellectual assets and skills, and compromises his professional standards and ethics to achieve a fraudulent victory at the polls for Democrats is called...a respected journalist.

I call him a prostitute, devoid of morals.

As I watch the footage of Tim Russert it is abundantly clear that his stature as both
a journalist and a human being make Chrissy Mathews and Keith Olbermann look like
the insignificant trolls they are. When the
two of them assume room temperature the network will be hard pressed to find even
two minutes of footage where they aren’t drooling or spewing venom.

Shortly after Hurricane Katrina, Tim Russert interviewed Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff. At this point it was too early to determine what went wrong. I thought Tim was particularly unfair in his interview with Chertoff, especially when he asked Chertoff if he planned on resigning. The interview seemed to me quite partisan, and I sent an email to Tim at Meet the Press to that effect. I wrote in my email that I had previously believed that Mr. Russert was on a par with Brit Hume, who I believe to be the best newsman in the business; however, after watching his interview with Chertoff I had changed my mind and lowered him a few grades in my esteem. I remember writing: “Sir, you are no Brit Hume!”

Nevertheless, I have continued to watch Meet the Press every Sunday, as well as my favorite Sunday news show Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. Although I felt that he leaned to the left at times, Tim Russert’s interviews were always informative, and as fair and balanced as you can expect in the liberal television media.

I will miss Tim Russert, and am saddened by his passing. My prayers go to his family.

"You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts"