This is a topic that needs to be explored more and Russert is one of many who are ignoring it.  I think Russert is afraid he will no longer get invited to McCains Ranch in Arizona for BBQ.

Well, either Russert knows nothing of the subject matter or he is a GOP sympathiser. Because being a journalist he is not.

If NBC's Washington Bureau Chief (Russert) cannot or will not do his job, he needs to resign.

That is not going to happen any time soon.

That is not going to happen any time soon.

Then he needs to start doing his job.

He has not done his jobs for 8 plus years why would he start now?

He has not done his jobs for 8 plus years why would he start now?

Because we're sick and tired of people like him that will only tell a story if it benefits Republicans or attacks Democrats.  If Lawrence Spivak, the original moderator of MTP, could see how Tim Rusert has destroyed what used to be an excellent example of responsible broadcast journalism, he's be spinning in his grave.

“Russert has been quick to appease right-wing criticism.  After questions were raised by callers to Limbaugh’s radio show about Russert’s handling of a 2003 interview with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Limbaugh e-mailed Russert seeking clarification.  As if Limbaugh or his audience were appropriate judges of journalistic fairness, Russert promptly replied, and Limbaugh proudly posted Russert’s response on his Web site.  “Rush, thanks for the note. … Believe me, Rush, I know what our troops have done for the people of Iraq.  They liberated them.  I hope your listeners noted my cross-examination of the Syrian deputy ambassador.  Really appreciate your note.  Best always, Tim.”

 

David Brock  --  “The Republican Noise Machine”

And we have a pair of flag pin festooned star spangled adult diapers for the first wingnut who gets confused, and thinks this item dealing with the failure to follow through on something noted in February is an old item from February.

Silly Colonel, it's nothing of the sort.  What it is is just more political advocacy from MMFA. for their push to any and all who are listening to get the anti-McCain stuff out there and keep it burning bright, and to those that aren't listening and follow their own programming decisions, shame on them.

Silly Colonel, it's nothing of the sort.  What it is is just more political advocacy from MMFA. for their push to any and all who are listening to get the anti-McCain stuff out there and keep it burning bright, and to those that aren't listening and follow their own programming decisions, shame on them.

"Programming decisions" are one thing, Tommy.  Deliberatly ignoring significant stories because they would cast a Republican in an unfavorable light is something else entirely.  As a journalist, Tim Rusert has a RESPONSIBILITY to report the news - not filter it for us.

Sorry, WZ, Tommy already explained what it "really" is. Have some respect for his bizarre delusions of authority.  ;0)

Russert is just too busy not having Barr on the show to discuss "the story" about McCain's ethics "that continues" to get spiked.

Tommy,

This is a media watchdog website, in case you didn't know.  What Media Matters is doing is monitoring the Media. 

Stories that are not reported are just as indicative of conservative misinformation as stories that are reported incorrectly, or outright lies.  Please re-read the mission statement and you can avoid silly posts like this.

 

Sorry, since MMFA lists all sorts of media outlets that did cover this story I wasn't aware it wasn't being covered at all, thanks for setting the record straight.

Tommy,

 This is a thread about Tim Russert.  It's not about all these "news outlets" you have in your mind. 

 

Col.

You brought it up. You get the diapers. :-)  

But I'm not  confused about it. What size you take, Barn?  ;0)

You brought it up. You get the diapers. :-)  

But you're the one who needs them, AA.   :-)

I don't care which one of you guys wear them...Just please make sure these diapers are biodegradable.

And if you have time, go hug a tree ;-)

J2, you are getting a bit better with the nappy humor. Well done. Now go take your nap :-0)

Only if you'll join me ;-)

 

Sorry luv, I suffer from insomnia :-) And then there's that restless leg syndrome as well. :-0)

But I'm sure Gov will accompany you. You two belong together (nap wise). Well, that's if you can pry him and T apart.

I can assure you that our companies products are environmentally friendly.

We use only biodegradable plastic liners and our absorbent materials are all from recycled issues of The Washington Times.

The colors we use to print the American flag on our adult diapers are made from food coloring and other natural pigments.

And of course our products are made in the good old USA, by American citizens who must report to work with flag pins on their lapels.

Our product line is aimed at the patriotic bedwetter who only feels warm when he's wrapped himself up in our nations flag.

King,

That description was worthy of a spot in the J Peterman catalogue ;-)

Well done!

I'll have to admit that Suzie helped me with the flowery words but some other guy who kept sidling up to us also took the credit.

No problem King, Jerry killed Suzie. As for that other guy, just give him some tic tacks so you can hear him coming.

Sheet, I miss Seinfeld :-/

Best sitcom ever!

That's why Worrierking has been Salesman of the Month for 58 months straight !

 

How is it that Rev. Wright can generate so much publicity and be the focus of so much supposedly "political" commentary, and Sen. Obama be asked so many questions about him, and yet Sen. John McCain just flys right under the radar on the matter of lobbyists in his presidential campaign?

From the New York Times article linked to above:

"About a sixth of the [McCain] campaign’s 106 top fund-raisers — dubbed innovators and trailblazers — are lobbyists."

...a sixth of 106 is 17 to 18: so I gues that's what's being said there (there is no good reason to say it so obliquely, as to include some total number, and to make it a fraction thereof, and to distract you with nick-names):

 

"About 17 or 18 of the McCain campaign’s top fund-raisers are lobbyists."

 

That's the same thing, said much more clearly and directly.

Also as part of that observation in the Times article, we have:

"Mr. McCain’s fund-raising chairman, Tom Loeffler, founded a lobbying firm that bears his name, and the campaign’s deputy finance chairman, Wayne Berman, is a major Republican lobbyist as well."

Now I guess we're supposed to have our inquiries into what corporate interests these lobbyists work for (and therefore what corporate interests Mr. McCain works for)... I guess our inquiries are supposed to be headed off, by the resignations of these and other lobbyists on McCain's campaign.

But do these resignations (and the new "rules" that prompted them), do they mean that John McCain does not still work for the corporate interests that those lobbyists represent?

Or do these resignations simply head off our inquiries into the same?

This is too much like criminals in a conspiracy, who upon learning that they are under surveillance, agree not to visit one another's homes or be seen together in public... but still share the same criminal designs nevertheless, having simply made "rules" for themselves to follow, to keep their conspiracy out of the evidence.

What were and are the corporate interests of the many lobbyists (17 or 18 or who knows how many) on the McCain staff?

What are Mr. McCain's corporate interests in being President of the United States?

Isn't the answer to those two questions the same thing? And what difference does it make that certain of the lobbyists on McCain's staff now disassociate themselves with his campaign... does that mean Mr. McCain and his staff no longer have those corporate interests as their agenda?

Aren't the "rules" Mr. McCain invokes, just meant to thwart our surveillance in these matters, and keep these people from any suspicion that corporate lobbyists and John McCain conspire with one another to gain our Presidency?

Aren't their new "rules" essentially to agree not to campaign or be seen together in public?

 

I know, these questions aren't as important as some incendiary fool in the pulpit... but they're still important questions anyway... and as far as John McCain somehow being able to fly under the radar on this matter, this matter of his campaign being directed and staffed by corporate lobbyists... well, this should be making a signature on the radar screen, about the size of a mountain.

 

Well done DEM...

You're pointing out what real journalism might consist of. 

If it existed? 

Unfortunately, the corportate media is only too willing to advance the interests of their corporate lobbyist friends.  Goes hand in hand.