Founder of Daily Kos Insists Mark Halperin's On a 'Jihad Against the Truth'
Markos Moulitsas, the founder and publisher of the Daily Kos, demonstrated that he can locate a vast right-wing conspiracy just like the rest of the Kosmonauts. Mark Halperin's suspension, for him, proved once again that Halperin is a right-wing fellow traveler with Joe Scarborough, who's the "real president" of MSNBC:
I think it's wonderful that Halperin betrayed his full feelings about Obama on the air. It's tiresome seeing people pretend that he's some sort of neutral political arbitrer [sic], when he's engaged in a long-running jihad against the truth.
Halperin, a real dick, was hired as MSNBC's "senior political analyst" at the behest of another dick, the network's real president Joe Scarborough. As I wrote after being blacklisted from that network:
According to Nexis, since the premiere of Morning Joe on October 22, 2007, Mark Halperin, MSNBC's "senior political analyst," has spent 70 percent of his on-air time either on Scarborough's show or shows hosted by his posse. It's pretty clear he exists merely because Scarborough wants him around.
And why would Scarborough -- a conservative host on the lowest-rated morning show on cable--want Halperin around? It isn't for his astute political acumen, because he has none of that. It's because they're fellow travelers in an ideological crusade against reality. How's that from the supposedly "liberal" MSNBC?
Today, Halperin was suspended by MSNBC for calling Obama a "dick". His sin was to breach the Beltway's pretend civility. As Greg Sargent says:
Halperin’s use of an expletive is trival when compared with the degradation of our political discourse we witness on a regular basis from Halperin and many others — degradation that is seen as perfectly acceptable because no curse words are employed. Suspending Halperin only reinforces a phony definition of “civility” in our discourse, in which it’s unacceptable to use foul language and be “uncivil,” but it’s perfectly acceptable for reporters and commentators to allow outright falsehoods to pass unrebutted; to traffic endlessly in false equivalences in the name of some bogus notion of objectivity; and to make confident assertions about public opinion without referring to polls which show them to be completely wrong.
As far as insults go, it's weak tea. As political analysis, it's laughable. As network policy, it's ludicrous. Fire Halperin's ass for being a useless piece of s--t who is always wrong about everything. Not for being a dick.