Skip to main content

View Diary: We finally know why John McCain is invading our TV every Sunday (242 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You don't assume she "agrees with him" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    because she sometimes puts Democrats on without "pairing them" with a Republican who can address what Republicans would call Democratic lies.    That doesn't mean she agrees with them, either.  

    Her job is to ask questions, let him answer, and let the viewers decide whether they buy what he is saying or not.   I will admit that this assumes that the audience is intelligent and informed; that way they can judge whether they buy what the guest is saying.  

    If you want a host who will clearly "address his lies and misrepresentations" you would probably be better off watching MSNBC prime time.  There's a completely different purpose to those shows -- they assume the viewers are all of the same political viewpoint, and go through every segment with the goal of proving which views they think are right.  

    •  He's never paired with anyone (7+ / 0-)

      He's put on like some oracle or some god on Olympus when he's really just a bitter old man. I don't want entertainment. I want clear discussions of policy, but you won't find that on any of the Sunday shows. McCain is thrown at the audience like he has some particular expertise in foreign policy where he has none. He's not treated the same as other guests on any of those shows. I don't sit down and watch any of these shows and MSNBC in particular triggered my gag reflex long ago.

    •  pointing out lies is somehow partisan? (7+ / 0-)

      that's an interesting view of how the press should work. I always thought that they should make sure to note factually incorrect information and contradictions, as opposed to just presenting both sides or one side and hope that the audience does their own research.
      You really have a habit of making an ass out of yourself trying to defend Republicans.  But to answer your question, almost any Republican could present the Republican viewpoint as well as McCain--even though the GOP doesn't have one coherent viewpoint, and even though it's highly questionable whether McCain speaks for any Republican other than himself and maybe Lindsey Graham on foreign policy.  
      Now my question to you is why do you think McCain is the best spokesman for Republican foreign policy?  If you haven't got anything better than he was a failed presidential candidate from the cycle before last and he's been around a long time, then you should probably stop digging now.  We get it, you don't like the big bad libs picking on one of your fellow Repubs.  

      you can shit on my face but that doesn't mean I have to lick my lips

      by red rabbit on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:49:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Depends on the "lie" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        when it's an objectively factual statement, like a thing happened on a particular date, or a number is wrong, sure, a journalist should point that out.

        But most of what people consider "lies" are not that.  They may be, for example, "lies" of omission like not mentioning something, or selectively discussing only portions of a bigger story, or characterizing facts in a certain way, or assuming the knowledge or motives of others.  Those are not the kinds of "lies" that journalists correct, because they involve making judgments.  Journalists are supposed to report what happened, what people say, and what positions they take, not make judgments about the validity or credibility of the positions taken or the things said.  

        Commentators, on the other hand, can -- and certainly do -- call out all those kinds of things.

        And where did I "defend Republicans"?  I simply said that McCain was one of the Republicans most often put forth by Republicans as representing their views on foreign policy and use of force.  He's been more outspoken on those topics over his career than most Republicans.  I'm not in any way defending what he is saying -- I'm simply making the point that he is most often the one saying it.  

        •  lies by omission are still lies (4+ / 0-)

          and yes, a real journalist, as opposed to the dictaphones that you favor, should point those out for the benefit of viewers.
          And yeah, you're defending Republicans.  On this thread it's been McCain and his media enablers, on others it's different Republicans or their shitty judicial appointments and decisions.  Your MO is glaringly obvious to everyone.

          you can shit on my face but that doesn't mean I have to lick my lips

          by red rabbit on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:14:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  the truth has a well known liberal bias (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z, lorell, bobatkinson, vernonbc

        Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
        Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights to talk about grief.

        by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:19:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site