Skip to main content

View Diary: Chris Christie's office blasts MSNBC as 'partisan' and 'openly hostile' (298 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, he is correct that MSNBC is partisan.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dirtandiron, Noah Andersen

    overall they do tend to put Democrats in a positive light, often when they do not deserve it.... but they are a hell of a lot better than the other 2 choices for cable news... and the Republicans are awful after all.

    I get very little out of MSNBC anymore.  They are no where near as good as they were 5 or 6 years ago. Democracy Now is far superior.

    So, the giant gas bag bully of New Jersey is right on this one occasion : )

    The U.S. and Israel are belligerent terrorist states. War crimes, large jailed populations, international law breaking, and massive propaganda are a few of the weapons used to crush any chance at peace.

    by Ipracticedissent on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 02:45:42 PM PST

    •  You're corrrect -- truth has a liberal bias. nt (12+ / 0-)

      "There's always room for cello." Yo Yo Ma

      by ceebee7 on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 02:55:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's sad that media now are on one side or the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HappyinNM

      other, but I think Fox is the one that created that sort of media market.

      Where are all the jobs, Boehner?

      by Dirtandiron on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 03:05:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Completely agree. MSNBC is partisan left (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pi Li, VClib

        and FNC is partisan right.  This means that there are whole segments of people who only watch shows that reinforce their own previously-held views and who never even hear what the other side has to say.  Many times, the two networks are not even talking about the same things, not even discussing the same events -- you'd almost wonder if they live in the same country.  It's only added to the complete divide in this country, and the inability of the two sides to work together, I think.  

        Yes, FNC created it, and was very successful at it, so MSNBC decided to be the left's counter to FNC, with somewhat less success in terms of ratings.  

        Some of us would prefer to see commentary shows that have intelligent people who respect each other from different political views actually talk to each other about issues, who actually respond to what each other says rather than simply spouting talking points, who are presented as if they each have something legitimate to say, and let us -- the viewer -- decide what we think about what each side says.  Those shows are getting harder to find.  

        And I think that's sad.

        •  Actually MSNBC is partisan Democrat which is (6+ / 0-)

          to say not very left at all.... they freeze out the left when covering many issues in favor of a strict party line.

          The U.S. and Israel are belligerent terrorist states. War crimes, large jailed populations, international law breaking, and massive propaganda are a few of the weapons used to crush any chance at peace.

          by Ipracticedissent on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 03:49:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, MSNBC is partisan left (20+ / 0-)

          but - - have you watched Rachel Maddow?  She is almost as likely to take Obama to task as she is Christie or Akin or Perry.  Can you say the same for FOX?  Do they EVER go after a Republican?  As in ever?  

          Last week, in fact, Megyn Kelly finally mentioned Christie - - only to give him a total pass and to excuse Kelly and Wildstein completely.  So much for media that is partisan right.

          And during and just after Sandy, I looked in on FOX just to see how they were handling it.  They weren't.  They were ignoring the storm that was wreaking havoc right outside their own doors.  Instead, they had Newt on.  It was all Benghazi all the time and not one word about Sandy while MSNBC was showing the phone numbers and the url for the Red Cross.

          Just sayin.

          •  Good comment. (3+ / 0-)

            We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

            by Observerinvancouver on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 04:29:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I did not compare FNC and MSNBC in any other (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VClib, Pi Li

            way than that they are both coming from one, and only one, political view.  And I generally don't watch shows dedicated to reinforcing only one political view.   That's just me, and my view.  So, no, I don't watch Maddow much, for that reason.  You may find her better than her competition on Fox, and I have no quarrel with that.  

            My only issue is that I think there are groups of people who  spend all of their time in the bubble of only those who agree with them that they believe anybody with different political views must either be totally evil and totally stupid -- as if the only reasonably intelligent and decent people in this country are people who share their political views.  I don't think that's healthy for our country.  And I think that partisan networks help reinforce that divide.  I generally prefer an approach where we can understand -- and yes, even respect -- people who have different political views, even when we disagree with those political views.  

            •  More right wing talking points - yet again. (7+ / 0-)

              You're simply repeating the typical right wing line -
              "both sides do it"
              Wrong.
              There's another saying that applies here - "the truth has a liberal bias"
              That's the difference between MSNBC and Fox. Fox lies and MSNBC doesn't.
              The facts, even reality, in soooo many instances have a liberal bias.
              Global warming - it's real. It's happening. But not in Fox land.
              Is pointing the absurdity of the conservative position slanted programming? No. It's telling the truth.
              Draconian voter restriction laws passed by conservatives under the guise of preventing non existent voter fraud. Would reporting on the funding and motives behind this movement be slanted? No. It's telling the truth.

              Time and time again the right tosses up this bogus argument bemoaning "partisanship" and try to cloak it the guise of "can't we all just get along?" It's more crap from the right.

              And you're repeating it.

        •  It's ridiculous to conflate MSNBC with Fox. Fox (17+ / 0-)

          has no concern whatsoever for the truth.  They lie and lie.  MSNBC may lean left but they do deal with facts.  They use facts to support their coverage.  That's a huge difference from Fox.  

          We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

          by Observerinvancouver on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 04:28:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No one "conflated" MSNBC with FNC. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VClib, Pi Li

            I said they have one similarity -- that they both are partisan -- approaching their commentary (during prime time) from one political viewpoint.  That is one aspect they definitely share.  There is nothing incorrect or "ridiculous" about noting that clearly true fact.  

            Saying that they have that in common -- which they unquestionably do -- is not the same as "conflating" them or saying they are alike in all respects.  If I say Apple and Toshiba make both make computers, I am pointing out one thing they have in common; I'm not "conflating" the two companies.  They share that one thing in common; the two companies are very different in almost all other respects.  

            My point was the one thing they share is the reason I don't watch much of either.  That's my choice.  

        •  Well, (11+ / 0-)

          while it's true that MSNBC has a POV that is to the left, and from the corporate POV, as a marketing goal rather than an ideological one, your comparison of the two is yet another case of false equivalency, imo.

          For starters, MSNBC and FOX operate under different rules. MSNBC is a news channel, FOX is an entertainment channel, and this isn't snark, this is how they are both classified. Which is why FOX gets away with much more BS than MSNBC does.

          And while MSNBC is decidedly partisan in the evening hours, not so much during the day. Certainly Morning Joe is evidence of this. You can name no "liberal" equivalent on Fox. Andrea Mitchell and Chris Mathews are also more centrist than can be found by a country mile on FOX.

          Furthermore, I have seen more righties given air time on MSNBC by miles and miles, then you will see lefties given time on FOX. I have listened to more ramblings from the right on MSNBC than I can sometimes stomach, but I expect to hear them there anyway.

          And of course they cover different stories much of the time, because FOX doesn't cover anything that might give voice to the left and because FOX IS the propaganda arm of the right. Bought and paid for.

          MSNBC HAS covered Benghazi, the IRS "scandal" and others, far more than FOX can say the same for say, Christie. In which case according to media matters they spent 15 total minutes on the day the bridge gate e-mails were exposed, when media outlets far beyond MSNBC were covering it wall to wall. And I can guarun-freaking-tee you that if a governor from the left was embroiled in this kind of labyrinth of scandal, MSNBC WOULD BE covering it for a lot more than 15 minutes.

          Finally, this:

          Some of us would prefer to see commentary shows that have intelligent people who respect each other from different political views actually talk to each other about issues, who actually respond to what each other says rather than simply spouting talking points,
          Yeah, well, wouldn't we all. But the truth is the right is not interested in mutual respect, and if they were you'd see maybe just an itty bit of it on FOX. You don't.

          Not saying MSNBC is the guy in the white hat, just saying your comparison of the two is one often made, one that I feel is NOT balanced, in important ways.

          "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

          by StellaRay on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 04:31:50 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Agree whole heartedly. Sometimes I think MSNBC (8+ / 0-)

            goes too far in having right wing crazies on.  Marcia Blackburn?  Tim Huelskamp?  Srsly?  I just can't understand why they book some of the people they do.  

            We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

            by Observerinvancouver on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 04:39:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  OMG, (7+ / 0-)

              Marcia Blackburn drives me crazy. Never answers a question directly, and I mean NEVER. Just spews talking points, often unrelated to the question. At least Michael Steele answers to the questions, whether I agree w/him or not. Of course he's now on MSNBC's payroll, which means he can't just blast bullshit the way Marcia does.

              I don't have a problem w/the right being represented on MSNBC. It's good for them and it's good for us, if not comfortable.  But I do think they get lazy, i.e., booking Marcia over and over again. But then who from the right would you book to get different?

              "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

              by StellaRay on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 04:44:51 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Blackburn = Tennessee Screech Owl (6+ / 0-)

                her voice drives me NUTS, and so does the insane DRIVEL she spouts, NONSTOP.

                America's LAST HOPE: vote the GOP OUT in 2014 elections. MAKE them LOSE the House Majority and reduce their numbers in the Senate. Democrats move America forward - Republicans take us backward and are KILLING OUR NATION!

                by dagnome on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 05:21:35 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Agreed. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Old Sailor, Observerinvancouver

                  But like I said, who can MSNBC hire to represent the other side that will not do this?

                  Seems to me that whoever so called moderate republicans are, they don't want to be on MSNBC showing they're moderate, or suggesting they would be willing to compromise in any way. Fact is, they can't, if they want to stay in office. There are many examples of more reasonable republicans who are no longer in office because they were willing to be reasonable.

                  And, sadly, there are more examples every day of congress people and senators who no longer want any part of this game. The GOP has turned everyone's efforts into the equivalent of a mouse on a wheel. LOL, soon we may have to run want ads for these jobs.

                  And yes, imo, this does fall squarely to the blame of the GOP's unprecedented obstructionism, and to their craven willingness to accept the dregs of democracy---racism and bigotry and greed, into the heart of their being, via the Tea Party and the likes of the Koch brothers.

                  The Democrats sure as hell are a long way from perfect, but really, nothing to compare to the thug like behavior of the GOP, which in so many ways, Chris Christie exemplifies.

                  "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                  by StellaRay on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 09:28:25 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Not all of MSNBC's commentators from the right (0+ / 0-)

                    are intolerable.  Michael Steele has always had a modicum of objectivity.  Hogan Gidley has a grasp of reality (plus I think he's cute).  Joe Watkins is bearable for the most part.  It's the idiots spouting talking points who make me gag.  

                    We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

                    by Observerinvancouver on Sun Jan 19, 2014 at 11:46:43 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  They are the same in one respect (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VClib, Pi Li

            they both are partisan.  

            The fact that I correctly recognized that one similarity does not mean I am saying they are the same in all other respects.  

            So you are arguing against a point I did not make.  I did not in any way compare them in anything OTHER than the fact that -- certainly in their prime time lineup (I work during the day so I don't see the daytime programming) -- both networks are from one partisan political viewpoint.   And that is a similarity that they absolutely do share.  

            •  Yes they do share that, (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              GustavMahler, CrissieP, Val, doroma, Old Sailor

              if you want to talk about their evening line up. Won't and didn't argue. Although I WILL continue to argue that MSNBC does "partisan" MUCH differently than FOX.

              And while I understand that say, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Kornaki, etc,  must perform w/in the limits of their corporate masters, they perform way better than FOX any day, putting out more facts and more work to get there than Fox cares to come close to matching---not necessary for their audience.  

              Imo, you DID make the point that MSNBC and FOX are the same, by your lack of reference to important differences between the two. And I hold fast to my point that there are many of those differences, despite their acknowledged "leans."

              It's OK, we can agree to disagree.

              "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

              by StellaRay on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 05:58:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  So if I point out a way two things are alike (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Pi Li

                I have some obligation to also go through all the ways that are different?  If I make the point that two things are alike in one way, and don't in the same post go through all of the differences, that means I am affirmatively saying that they are alike in all ways?  Who made that rule?

                Imo, you DID make the point that MSNBC and FOX are the same, by your lack of reference to important differences between the two.
                 If I make a statement in a post that Christie and Cuomo are both governors of states in the northeast, that's the same as saying that they are alike in all ways???  That's what you are saying and that's absurd.    

                I pointed out the one way they are alike, because that is the reason I don't watch much of either, and because I think that that one way they are alike -- that they both are partisan -- is not healthy for the country.   In other words the way that they are alike was relevant to the point I wanted to make.  If you want to make a point where their differences are relevant, that's fine, that's your prerogative.  I have no quarrel with that. But I do have an issue with you attributing to me a point I did NOT make.  

                •  Your mind is quite set (8+ / 0-)

                  to the fact that both MSNBC and FOX are alike enough for you to disqualify either of  them from being something you want to watch, in your own words.  That's fine, and your choice. Although boy, if you have a problem w/the partisanship of MSNBC, I do wonder why you want to be here.

                  As many ways as you want to say this, the fact remains that you have decided both these outlets equal the same response from you---they are both "too partisan" for your tastes and "not good for the country."

                  We don't share this view. And no matter how many times you want to tell me that's a point you didn't make, you made it again here. And we do not agree. For me, I am thankful that the market has created some answer to FOX.

                  "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." Theodore Roosevelt.

                  by StellaRay on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 07:14:57 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Again (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Old Sailor

              your point that they are both partisan is completely irrelevant. Aren't you tired yet?

              "When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two." - Nisargadatta Maharaj.

              by mkor7 on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 09:28:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Fox "coverage" of Christie (5+ / 0-)

            I recall the day all those emails came out about Christie administration figures, Shep Smith, who's about as good as it gets over there, basically said, "well, there's some interesting emails out there on this issue. Go Google them for yourself." Yeah, don't expect me to tell you what's in those emails. I'm not allowed to be critical of Roger Ailes' GOP darling.

            MSNBC was all over the Blago debacle in Illinois. Rachel reported on it incessantly. While he's not exactly a liberal exemplar, he was a Democrat and an embarrassment, and MSNBC could have taken the "go Google the transcripts of the phone calls" approach, but it didn't. And you never saw Rachel's chyron operators put an R after Blago's name.

      •  I really don't think MSNBC's coverage is (23+ / 0-)

        partisan on this issue. Someone (probably Christie) shut down two lanes on the GWB for a reason, probably financial. A city in NJ was 80% underwater after Sandy, and the city was given less than 1% of what was requested from federal funds, also for financial reasons. All media should be reporting on this. This is some pretty sleazy stuff.

    •  They seem to be forgetting that Christie (19+ / 0-)

      himself has been a guest on Morning Joe many times and that Scarborough and his cronies slobber all over him.

      "Forever is composed of nows." Emily Dickinson

      by Leftovers on Sat Jan 18, 2014 at 03:24:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site