MSNBC Correspondent Shuster Goes on Shameful Cindy Sheehan Style Antiwar Rant

Photo of Noel Sheppard.

In 2006, one of the most shameless Democrat pols in the media was certainly MSNBC correspondent David Shuster who repeatedly and consistently behaved more like a left-leaning political operative than a television journalist. On Wednesday’s “Hardball,” Shuster made it clear that objectivity and impartiality were not on his New Year’s resolutions list.

As NewsBuster Mark Finkelstein has been reporting, Chris Matthews has been virtually foaming at the mouth lately concerning his desire for American troops to be immediately withdrawn from Iraq. On Wednesday, his partner in crime nicely set up the 7PM EST installment with an antiwar rant that could have been performed by Cindy Sheehan (video available here).

After showing a brief clip of President Bush asking the new Congress to “set aside politics and focus on the future,” Shuster complained, “But the president made no mention of the Iraq War.” Then, the rant really began. The reader is hereby warned to put a lobster bib on to protect clothing from the foam spewing out of Shuster's mouth:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The total number of American service members killed in Iraq is now greater than the total number of people killed on 9/11. An attack Iraq had nothing to do with. And on the heels of one of the deadliest months since the war in Iraq began, NBC News has learned President Bush`s change in strategy will be to send in even more American troops.

These statements were extraordinary coming from a supposedly unbiased journalist. After all, if Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks on America on 9/11, what does the number of American casualties that day have to do with the number of troops killed during the Iraq war? Furthermore, there has been a highly public discussion going on for weeks within the Bush administration and members of Congress on both sides of the aisle concerning a surge in troops. Was this the first Shuster had heard about this? Regardless, his rant continued:

According to U.S. officials, the president`s plan, known as "surge and accelerate", will be announced next week and will add another 20,000 troop to the 140,000 already in Iraq. It is not the change of course most American expected last November. When they voted Democrats into control of Congress. After the election, the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Commission urged the Bush administration to begin a gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops.

Yes, David. However, you failed to point out to your viewers that the ISG report also suggested a temporary increase in troops if it would strengthen security in Iraq now thereby making a withdrawal of troops more likely in the future. Of course, sharing that information with the viewer would have diminished the point. Alas, Shuster was just getting warmed up:

The American military has long been a staunch supporter of President Bush and the Iraq War. The 2004 presidential campaign, a survey of thousands of active duty military personnel found that 63 percent approved of the president`s handling of the Iraq War. Now according to a new survey by "The Military Times" the number is down to just 35 percent approval, 42 percent disapproval. The new poll also found that only 41 percent of the military believes the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place.

And when it comes to an increase of U.S. troops in Iraq, only 38 percent of the military supports the idea, 39 percent are opposed. And 13 percent say all U.S. forces should be removed from Iraq today.

Of course, no antiwar rant this week would be complete without suggesting how Saddam’s recent execution reflects negatively on the Bush administration:

Images of Shiites taunting Saddam in his final moments have been played repeatedly on Arab channels across the Middle East. And with Iraqis, Sunnis and Shiites already in a civil war, Democrats and Republicans in Congress fear the violence will now get even worse for the Iraqi government and for U.S. troops.

And, no anti-Bush rant would be complete without somehow bringing up one of the worst natural disasters in American history that the president didn’t miraculously prevent:

A White House spokesman later said President Bush has not yet seen the Saddam video. The images have been part of an international discourse for days. And critics say the president`s detachment is reminiscent of Hurricane Katrina when the president didn`t appreciate the aftermath or public war until an advisor showed him a tape several crucial days later.

How disgraceful. What follows is a partial transcript of this segment.

DAVID SHUSTER, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Today President Bush met with his Cabinet and then urged the new Congress to work with the administration in a bipartisan fashion.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT: It is time to set aside politics and focus on the future.

SHUSTER: But the president made no mention of the Iraq War. The total number of American service members killed in Iraq is now greater than the total number of people kill on 9/11. An attack Iraq had nothing to do with. And on the heels of one of the deadliest months since the war in Iraq began, NBC News has learn President Bush` change in strategy will be to send in even more American troops.

According to U.S. officials, the president`s plan, known as "surge and accelerate", will be announced next week and will add another 20,000 troop to the 140,000 already in Iraq. It is not the change of course most American expected last November. When they voted Democrats into control of Congress. After the election, the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Commission urged the Bush administration to begin a gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops. And throughout the fall, the top U.S. commander in Iraq said a U.S. troop surge would be a mistake.

GEN. JOHN ABIZAID, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: No, I do not believe that more American troops right now is the solution to the problem.

SHUSTER: The American military has long been a staunch supporter of President Bush and the Iraq War.

The 2004 presidential campaign, a survey of thousands of active duty military personnel found that 63 percent approved of the president`s handling of the Iraq War. Now according to a new survey by "The Military Times" the number is down to just 35 percent approval, 42 percent disapproval. The new poll also found that only 41 percent of the military believes the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place.

And when it come to an increase of U.S. troops in Iraq, only 38 percent of the military supports the idea, 39 percent are opposed. And 13 percent say all U.S. forces should be removed from Iraq today.

In Washington though, all eyes are on the Democrats and Republicans in Congress. Lawmaker in both parties have been exasperated, what they call the mishandling of the Iraq War. Evidenced again last week, according to lawmakers, by the execution of Saddam Hussein.

Images of Shiites taunting Saddam in his final moments have been played repeatedly on Arab channels across the Middle East. And with Iraqis, Sunnis and Shiites already in a civil war, Democrats and Republicans in Congress fear the violence will now get even worse for the Iraqi government and for U.S. troops.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think Saddam`s execution was handled appropriately?

SHUSTER: A White House spokesman later said President Bush has not yet seen the Saddam video. The images have been part of an international discourse for days. And critics say the president`s detachment is reminiscent of Hurricane Katrina when the president didn`t appreciate the aftermath or public war until an advisor showed him a tape several crucial days later.

On Iraq, the political landscape for the president`s escalation strategy is daunting. As it stands, columnist Robert Novak wrote today the president will find support for U.S. troop surge in Iraq from only 12 out of 49 Republican senators.

(on camera): And as for the Democrats, on the House side today, they had a meeting interrupted by anti-war activists, complaining that oversight hearings on Iraq are not enough. In fact, most Democrats want the U.S. to start an Iraq withdrawal. But it still not clear if Democratic leaders in Congress have the stomach for a fight.

I`m David Shuster for HARDBALL in Washington.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I thought I had remembered Sh

I thought I remembered watching Shuster, a few years ago, on Fox News. I just checked, and yep, that was him. More evidence that Fox doesn't hire Republican operatives as reporters. But, evidently, MSNBC encourages their people to practice advocacy journalism. At Fox, Shuster must have chaffed at the restraints put on him to appear neutral. His anti-war attitude was just too big to keep in the closet...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

Shuster

Shuster was the one chasing Gary Condit around, sticking a mike in his face. A gallant seeker of truth, this Shuster.  BAARF

NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal

Is this guy bucking for a job

Is this guy bucking for a job at Al-Jazeera or what?  These guys are not going to get it through their thick heads until another U.S. city is attacked - if then.  They should all be locked up for treason.

The truth may be ugly, but it is still the truth.

"..critics say the pre

"..critics say the president`s detachment..."

Come on Shuster, just substitute your name for "critics". That's really what you mean.

Maybe I should try this tatic the next time Mrs MightyMouth asks: "does this make my butt look big?". I can respond: "Well honey, critics say that it does, but of course I am not one of them". This kind of backhanded "journalism" is getting old.

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

mm, (lol) excellent idea. Sti

mm, (lol) excellent idea. Still I think "critics" would be getting the deep freeze treatment for awhile...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

When you get out of the hospi

When you get out of the hospital, can you tell exactly how that big can of wup-ass put you there? Just want to put that in the "Don't do that!" column of my To-Do list.

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad

So, if President Bush watch

So, if President Bush watched the Saddam hanging, would the result of the hanging change, David? What would the President viewing that accomplish, other than a waste of time? Think he might change his mind about capital punishment?

And critics claim Fox News is biased….

Is this guy bucking for a job

Is this guy bucking for a job at Al-Jazeera or what?  These guys are not going to get it through their thick heads until another U.S. city is attacked - if then.  They should all be locked up for treason.

The truth may be ugly, but it is still the truth.

More

Watch for more coming from Shuster, Matthews, Scarborough, Olbermann and their ilk. MSNBC is leading the charge for surrender. In their warped minds, even if millions die to feed their insatiable lust for America's downfall, so be it. Traitors all.

NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal

SHUSTER: A White House spokes

SHUSTER: A White House spokesman later said President Bush has not yet seen the Saddam video. The images have been part of an international discourse for days. And critics say the president`s detachment is reminiscent of Hurricane Katrina when the president didn`t appreciate the aftermath or public war until an advisor showed him a tape several crucial days later. Thsi is just one of the dumbest things hew could have said. Saddam is dead, will he be deader (sic) if Bush watches the tape? Hasn't made shuster any smarter.

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad

Speaking of Sheehan style ludicrousness

Speaking of Sheehan style ludicrousness -- no, better yet straight to the oriface of the vile being.

Remember Hurricane Katrina? The media's loudest complaint was that more troops were needed in the immediate aftermath (with no disclosure that it was Gov. Blanco preventing just that - naturally enough).

So what did Cindy Sheehan have to offer? "George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans..." September 16th, 2005. Oh golly gee that would help!

Shuster - Hardball - Sheehan = synonymous

Great catch N.S. Shuster's piece was simply a shrill commentary from the Sheehan camp.

Just exactly which part of Ge

Just exactly which part of George W. Bush, the President of the United States, which makes him the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces and solely responsible for the security of said country do these libs not understand?

As soon as I hear Shuster's n

As soon as I hear Shuster's name mentioned and his upcoming mile wide mouthed shite, I turn it...simple as that...Matthews is bad enough...

Two peas's in a pod. 

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under."  Ronald Reagan