Ken Berwitz
Brent Bozell and Tim Graham, at the Media Research Center, have written an excellent commentary on the difference between CNBC\’s handling of the Republican debate and MSNBC\’s of the Democrat debate.
It is, 100% worth your while to use this link and read every word. But let me give you just the first three paragraphs:
After the CNBC debate, Republicans were outraged at the vicious personal attacks not even disguised as questions from the moderators. Defenders of CNBC suggested the Republicans were just whining. President Obama joked that if GOP candidates can\’t handle TV moderators, they could never handle Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.
Then the Obama-lovers at Comcast proves Republicans\’ point. When NBC anchor Lester Holt sat down for an interview with the president on November 2, there were no attacks. It was business as usual, just another syrupy Brian Williams-style lovefest.
“So many hopes and aspirations were placed on you as the first African-American President,” Holt oozed. “As you approach this area of criminal justice reform, is this, in your mind, your defining moment, that would seal the legacy of what we would expect from the first African-American President?”
The NBC brand is in shambles. There is no pretense of impartiality anywhere. The Comcast empire is firmly vested in the Democrats. After the CNBC mess, Sen. Ted Cruz suggested Republicans should moderate Republican debates, not as cheerleaders but as real moderators, not gotcha Democrats. Liberals scoffed, of course.
Mr. Bozell and Mr. Graham go on to show the the kind of MSNBC “questions” (if you can call them questions, instead of syrupy “I love you, I agree with you, we are one” fare), that Democrat presidential hopefuls were fed by the moderator – that stalward neutralist Rachel Maddow.
At the end of their commentary, Bozell and Graham suggest that Republicans wash their hands of Comcast completely – a clean, total break.
Personally, though that thought has to be immensely satisfying to Republicans, I don\’t think it\’s feasible. But there certainly are strong grounds to put it under consideration.
My final point: I watched a little bit of this morning\’s Today Show (on NBC which, of course, is also part of the Comcast umbrella). And at the end of NBC National Correspondent Peter Alexander\’s “analysis” of the debate, he noted that Marco Rubio said “Welders make more money than philosophers. We need more welders than philosophers”. Alexander, unable to contain his smirk, informed us that Rubio was wrong – philosophy professors make much more than welders. This bit of “intelligence” was also presented by the left wing web site gawker.com and, I am certain, numerous other such venues as well.
The problem? Rubio didn\’t say anything about philosophy professors, he made a general comment about “philosophers” – i.e. people who pontificate, whether on the job or elsewhere. His point, of course, was that a tradesman has value. But Alexander (and gawker.com) could not resist intentionally misunderstanding this to take a cheap shot.
Gee, I guess Bozell and Graham had a point……
