It's a bit early for a Passover Seder, but Tim Russert recited his own version of the Four Questions on this morning's Meet the Press. Not once, not twice, but four times Russert put questions to Jack Murtha clearly designed to provoke the anti-war congressman into taking a verbal swing at Vice-President Cheney. Murtha refused to rise to his host's bait. Russert began by displaying Mr. Cheney's recent statement [displayed below]. Palpably fishing for an irate, headline-grabbing response, he put this provoking question to Murtha:"How does it feel to be linked with Al-Qaeda by the Vice-President?"
View video clip of Russert's questions here.
Murtha answered with a chuckle and the fairly mild complaint that the VP isn't listening to what he's saying. Not obtaining the outraged reaction he was seeking, Tim tried again, this time upping the ante by raising Murtha's military background:"But you're a Marine. Do you like being linked with Al-Qaeda?"
Again, Murtha wouldn't bite, offering the bland notion that the Iraqis themselves would take care of Al-Qaeda. Russert wouldn't be stopped: "You think the Vice-President's questioning your patriotism?"
Murtha was clearly committed to taking the high road: "No I don't think so." At that point I figured Russert would give it a rest. But, remarkably, he made once last try to wring a quotable comment out of his guest:
"Did he apologize to you?"Murtha dismissed the notion with a good-natured chuckle, observing that at least VP Cheney didn't blame him for bringing about the British withdrawal.
A disgraceful performance on Russert's part. Yes, it's a host's job to elicit his guest's opinions. But here, with his repeated, provocative questions, Russert was clearly seeking heat -- and headlines -- rather than light. What does it say about the objectivity of Russert, MTP and NBC that Tim took a harder line with VP Cheney than Jack Murtha himself?
Mark was in Iraq in November. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Linked with Al-Qaeda? I'm
March 4, 2007 - 11:13 ET by Dee BunkLinked with Al-Qaeda? I'm so sick of these liberals. Dick Cheney didn't link him with Al-Qaeda. Russert is outrageous. I haven't heard him say any Democrat like Pelosi, Obama or Murtha is linking Bush & Cheney with Al-Qaeda when they say that Bush is creating more terrorists.
This is the liberals typical trick. Jump up and down and claim that Republicans are attacking their patriotism, being racist or homophobic and now the claiming that they are being linked with Al -Qaeda when all Republicans do is give a civil coherent arguments that disagree with Liberal methods.
The irony here is that Murt
March 4, 2007 - 11:15 ET by Mark FinkelsteinThe irony here is that Murtha didn't accuse Cheney of linking Dems with Al-Qaeda -- Russert did!
I know Mark it's unbelievab
March 4, 2007 - 11:25 ET by Dee BunkI know Mark it's unbelievable. What has happened to Russert? He never used to be this bad. Now I think he should marry Helen Thomas - he doesn't just sound like her - he looks like her too!
I used to watch Russert's sho
March 4, 2007 - 11:30 ET by ThisnThatI used to watch Russert's show because I, too, thought he was ok in the past. Now I avoid it like I do the other Sunday shows, unless I think there's a guest on that should be listened to. I checked the guest list yesterday and saw that I wouldn't be contributing to Global Warming today by leaving the TV off.
We're reducing your Global
March 4, 2007 - 11:32 ET by Mark FinkelsteinWe're reducing your Carbon Footprint by .02 mm in our official log book ;-)
Mark - in that vein, are you
March 4, 2007 - 11:41 ET by Chicago RepublicanMark - in that vein, are you selling Carbon Offsets? I want to watch the Hee Haw Marathon on CMT tonight and burning the kilowatts to do so would eat at my conscience.
**************
Support the Spread of Open Society and Capitalism around the World. Do it for the Children.
As a matter of fact, I am.
March 4, 2007 - 11:43 ET by Mark FinkelsteinAs a matter of fact, I am. Send $5 and I promise not to watch Hee Haw. My agreement not to watch HBO's 'Rome' will cost you $10. And tuning out '24' tomorrow will, naturally, run you $24 ;-)
Well Mark - you and NB are
March 4, 2007 - 11:57 ET by Dee BunkWell Mark - you and NB are sure doing your part because I don't watch anything anymore because of you and the steam that used to come out of my head caused a lot more global warming than the electricity to my T.V.!
I'll pass on Rome, but 24 I w
March 4, 2007 - 11:59 ET by Chicago RepublicanI'll pass on Rome, but 24 I will have to pay the $24 for. Took me how many years but I'm finally hooked. Also, I'll throw in an additional 5 bucks if you promise not to smoke a cigar during 24. Thanks.
**************
Support the Spread of Open Society and Capitalism around the World. Do it for the Children.
LOL. I didn't start watchi
March 4, 2007 - 12:02 ET by Mark FinkelsteinLOL. I didn't start watching '24' till this season either. I did so at the urging of readers here and at Free Republic, and now am hooked too. Here's an idea: why don't we both watch, and just not tell Algore?
Ah Mark, this is why you are
March 4, 2007 - 12:10 ET by Chicago RepublicanAh Mark, this is why you are a good man and not a Global Warming Robber Baron like Al. You could have taken my money and you declined. Thanks.
(to wife) "Honey, tear up the check to Finkelstein."
**************
Support the Spread of Open Society and Capitalism around the World. Do it for the Children.
And what is his attendant fre
March 4, 2007 - 11:43 ET by NL207And what is his attendant freedom footprint reduction?
Actually, I'd like to apply f
March 4, 2007 - 11:53 ET by ThisnThatActually, I'd like to apply for a bit more in this instance -- because I am also reducing, significantly, the amount of CO2 I would normally release by talking back to the TV.
However, come to think of it, this activity usually heats up the room, so I am saving credits by not having to throw another log on the fire.
OK, I'll accept the .02 mm credit. I'll bicycle to the bank tomorrow and open up a deposit....
Thisnthat - it's such a sha
March 4, 2007 - 11:39 ET by Dee BunkThisnthat - it's such a shame. I loved Meet the Press for many years. I used to think he was not bias, but it's probably only because I didn't have access to other information. That -and I do think he is losing it. He should get off the air before he ends up like Dan Rather.
Well, Mark, he just opened
March 4, 2007 - 13:13 ET by motherbeltdelete double post
Well, he just opened the do
March 4, 2007 - 13:15 ET by motherbeltWell, he just opened the door for Murtha; hoping he would take the bait, and go on a rant about Cheney. As pointed out, he tried several times, and Murtha didn't bite. Poor Tim. Looks like if he wants to bash Cheney, he'll have to strap on a pair and do it himself.
The way liberals attack and therefore interpret
March 4, 2007 - 12:24 ET by SportPoliticsThe way liberals attack and therefore interpret:
Since liberals like Russert are constantly saying things in a subtle and angular fashion in order to attack republicans, they automatically equate anything Bush or Cheney says with the same "veiled and covered insinuating attack" doctrine. It's only natural that Russert is offended by what Cheney said, and certainly believes it was a harmful rip on the democrats. That's how the left press attacks republicans all the time, with every statement, even when they aren't openly showing their colors. They just cannot help themselves,so it had enormous meaning to the lib Russert.
The second part of it is, it's true, and we all know that really hurts the libdems, and nary one has had a response to it, other than "make them stop", and "don't question my patriotism".
" I don't question their patriotism, I question their judgement. " VP D. Cheney.
Clearly the Vice President
March 4, 2007 - 11:18 ET by Jack BauerClearly the Vice President mistook the elderly and recondite* Murtha for a Shiite.
An easy mistake to make.
*recondite is our pompous lib***l word of the day.
Atta boy Jack, relegate their
March 4, 2007 - 17:53 ET by rimskyAtta boy Jack, relegate their sorry butts into obscurity!
Ditto the comments about Russ
March 4, 2007 - 12:25 ET by dahliatraversDitto the comments about Russert having become "unbalanced".
Maybe he's ticked off about being forced to testify in the Libby trial.
Or maybe he misses the spotlight of the trial and is trying to draw it back on himself.
For all his bluster and seemi
March 4, 2007 - 13:14 ET by GalvanicFor all his bluster and seeming idiocy, the Ol' Unindicted Co-Conspirator is still shrewd enough to avoid the trap of the wily Russert-snake.
Good point, Mark. It does s
March 4, 2007 - 14:10 ET by Ken ShepherdGood point, Mark. It does sound like Russert was seeking heat rather than light as you noted. When conservatives are assailed by liberals, we don't expect that same persistence by interview show types who are itching for a fight. Maybe on some level we should, but then again, public policy should be about a war of ideas, not personalities.
This is standard operating pr
March 4, 2007 - 14:39 ET by TEThis is standard operating procedure for Russert. When he has a like-minded leftist on his program, he doesn't challenge that guest on the guest's position on an issue; Russert merely prompts the guest to attack Bush, Cheney or other Republicans. I also get a kick out of how Russert routinely has the likes of Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel, John McCain or some other worthless RINO represent the "Republican" view. With those RINOs, Russert also routinely prompts them to attack Bush, Cheney or the actual Republican view.
Dick Cheney is a disaster as
March 4, 2007 - 15:39 ET by BillAdkinsDick Cheney is a disaster as is his vice president, Bush. They aren't fighting this Blunder in Iraq for America - they're fighting it for themselves in a last desperate effort to salvage any reputation they can. As for those who use the phrase 'support the troops' in an effort to silence criticism of the Blunder in Iraq, you are cowards who are backstabbing those very troops.
Ah, another troll.With the sa
March 4, 2007 - 15:45 ET by BlondeAh, another troll.
With the same old DKos talking points.
Why don't you go over to HuffPost and let them know how much you hate Dick Cheney and wished he'd been killed?
Next.
So, BillAdkins - did you have a point, other than a talking poin
March 4, 2007 - 15:46 ET by acaiguanaSo, BillAdkins - did you have a point, other than a talking point?
I guess if you don't respond to this, you only had a talking point.
So, let me see, scenario number 1. Finally someone in the administration (Dick Cheney) has stood up and told the Democrats to stop with it already. Stop trying to undermine the American will to fight, stop trying to undermine the morale of our troops and stop trying to defeat us in a war by getting us to turn tail and run like cowards.
And you don't like that. So, you come here and post, "Dick Cheney is a disaster..." Um...
You might re-read the Constitution because you obviously don't understand the country in which you live.
Or maybe you do but think you are cute? That's not cute my friend. That is just silly, sort of like an immature child throwing a tantrum and spitting on everyone around them.
You guys 'own' defeat.
Get it?
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
Why certainly I have a point
March 4, 2007 - 16:19 ET by BillAdkinsWhy certainly I have a point and I've made it. That it sailed over your head is not surprise. As to 'owning' defeat - it rather looks like YOU guys have possession right now. Get it?
So, it was a talking point. How unsurprising and shallow.
March 4, 2007 - 16:28 ET by acaiguanaSo, it was a talking point. How unsurprising and shallow.
You know, it would be nice if for once one of you guys representing the rather mentally ill Democrat Party would come here and talk something besides talking points.
Too much to ask, I know.
Get It?
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
Seriously Bill
March 4, 2007 - 18:35 ET by acumenA serious question Bill - Who do you hate more, Cheney or the Iraqis?
Hate cheney? He's not worth t
March 4, 2007 - 20:24 ET by BillAdkinsHate cheney? He's not worth the effort. As for the Iraqis, let them have their civil war. Iraq is the biggest foreign policy and strategic blunder in our history. I used to think Jimmy Carter was the worst president in American history - then along came George W. Bush to lower the bar. To those who say we have lost the war in Iraq I say pull your heads out of your asses. We won in Iraq - now they're fighting among themselves and theirs no front - result, our troops are surrounded. Someone explain that to acurguano or whatever his name is. Be prepared to use crayons and construction paper though, and only let him have blunt scissors.
Enough of your a**hat comment
March 4, 2007 - 20:31 ET by BlondeEnough of your a**hat comments.
You're reading deficient, and rude to boot.
Clean it up, make a point, or go away.
You are blonde, aren't you?
March 4, 2007 - 20:32 ET by BillAdkinsYou are blonde, aren't you?
Of course not you liberal tro
March 4, 2007 - 20:35 ET by BlondeOf course not, you liberal troll.
I'm a redhead with a screen name of "Blonde".
That's why you find me so annoying.
Back atcha Bill
March 4, 2007 - 21:07 ET by acumenSo if Cheney isn't worth the effort why your previous post?
So you think fighting the terrorists in Iraq rather than in Manhattan is "the biggest foreign policy and strategic blunder in our history?" You follow this thought with the declaration that we won in Iraq. So winning equals the biggest blunder in our history? Talk among your dissenting egos and get back to me when you guys make up your mind.
However, I do agree with your "won in Iraq" personality. I guess it goes without saying who the Commander in Chief was during that victory - I'm thinking that is the guy your other personality referred to as the worst president in American history.
So your real stumbling block seems to be "they're fighting amongst themselves" - Are you insinuating this is something new or different in the Middle East? The difference is that after centuries of biggest dog on the dune wins, now the Iraqis and Afghani's have a new form of government based on Democratic principles and a system of law comparable to the West. Surely you recognize this is a good thing. And surely you don't expect this cultural transition to happen overnight, in a year or even a decade.
Perhaps your stumbling block is "our troops are surrounded". Not that I agree with your assesment, but If we pull out before the Iraqi army and police forces are capable of providing security in their country then I would join you in considering that a strategic blunder. You might wonder if more American troops lives are worth the effort. Simply ask yourself if it is a good thing or a bad thing to have two governments friendly to the West in the volatile Middle East where Bill Adkins and his fellow infidels are enemy #1.
It's simple, if you don't agree with the task at hand then do our troops a favor and get out of the way. Your dissent only gives hope to the terrorist bucketheads in the Middle East. The terrorists only hope that if Americans whine long and loud enough, America will leave and they can go back to their previous lifestyle of throwing women off of rooftops for going to the well without a family escort and exporting more aviation buffs to the US. I prefer we stay until the Iraqis can defend themselves and teach their children to respect all cultures and religions instead of how to build bombs to kill infidels. Then not only America, but the Bill Adkins, the Iraqis and the rest of the free world will have truly won in Iraq.
ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
March 4, 2007 - 15:49 ET by gfrrmanZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................SSDD
Murtha
March 4, 2007 - 16:11 ET by jaywlJack Murtha reminded me what a silver-tongued fox the old
boy is. He cloaks his defeatist ideas in words so sensible one could conclude
that we must, of course, follow his plan. Murtha repeats over and over we must
not send troops into combat without proper training and equipment. Why, of
course! Who could argue with that? However, no troops will ever have enough of
either for Murtha. I won’t go into a rebuttal of his entire performance, but
when I listen to people like him I wonder how they forget the lessons of
history. Lindsey Graham, no stranger to the camera and
pomposity himself, responding to Russert’s intense questioning dealt with some
of this in a masterly way after Murtha spent his allotment repeating tested sound
bites. As a former Marine, one is
particularly irritating to me. When he delivers
the line about getting the troops out of the palaces, usually followed by the
closing of Gitmo and bulldozing Abu-Ghraib, I cringe at his utter disregard of
facts and his disrespect of the troops. I can’t believe this man really thinks
our guys are in the palaces drinking beer, having a good old time. So, I am
left with the image of this tired out old man worried about his legacy, willing
to do anything, say anything as long as it advances his agenda.
O'Reilly is correct that NB
March 4, 2007 - 16:23 ET by daveinbocaO'Reilly is correct that NBC is feeling the Bolshie vibes from Jeff Zucker and the new nomenklatura now that the network is in the kinder-gentler Immelt mode rather than looking over their shoulder at the irascible conservative Jack Welch.
Russert is a sanctimonious little mamma's boy pitching his altar-boy BS while he lies his way to the top of the inside-the-Beltway wormcan.
The creepy lil' dork lied to the judge in the Libby trial and his integrity is on the same ash-heap as Matthews and Williams. NBC Nightly News is hemorrhaging viewers and Charlie Gibson is gaining them in equal numbers.
But Zucker wants to be a player in a Dhimmitude administration, so he'll take the hits as long as his personal ego metastasizes throughout the Dhimmi universe.
Fact
March 4, 2007 - 16:35 ET by gfrrmanThere was nothing in Cheney's statement that wasn't a fact. That's what chaps these libs and they have nothing to come back with.
gfrrman.. Correct me here,
March 4, 2007 - 17:46 ET by Ran56gfrrman.. Correct me here, but didn't "Blinky" Palooshi tell Cheney "That" issue wasn't debateble and that she was gonna snitch to Daddy?..*S*
Huh?
March 4, 2007 - 18:29 ET by gfrrmanHuh?
Why did Twin Chin Russert not
March 4, 2007 - 17:43 ET by Right Wing Attack DogWhy did Twin Chin Russert not ask Mr. Cut, Run, Raise the white flag and surrender, withhold funding from the military, why he won't release his military service record? Answer: He's a lying coward that did not deserve the medals he was awarded, just like the french sissy John Kerry.
Russert vs Murtha and Cheney
March 4, 2007 - 19:52 ET by Larryt39You see why so many of us out here, that have always been Russerts fans, are only hoping now that Mr. Libby is found not guilty of anything. Russert and his buddies, especially on the Imus Show, are constantly praising Russert as being honest. The hell he is...he is as big a liar as the rest of the media (NBC-MSNBC). If they were not such Bush-Cheney haters, then perhaps we could believe more of their bull.. But I am inclined to believe Libby. Russert is a hasbeen and I am glad you folks have caught him on this one. Thanx, Larry T. Doughty, Brewer, Me. larrytdoughty@yahoo.com, www.ourstory.com/larrytdoughty.
Russert/Libby
March 4, 2007 - 20:02 ET by PawpawNYou hit the nail on the head. He's lost it because Libby will be not guilty and his so-called reputation may be in trouble, especially if the jurors give statements about why they voted for aquittal. Mr Double Chin Hawk Looking Russert may be who put the reasonable doubt in their minds!
Murtha cant' remember where h
March 4, 2007 - 22:46 ET by BlazerMurtha cant' remember where he took his last dump at, let alone what Cheney said last week! Good god how does one get that fat, and live to be 72?