Mitt Romney will be on MTP Sunday. The only thing you can predict in advance is that he will get treated with kid gloves by the host, Karl Rove dancer David Gregory–a fella who has built his career on fluffing wingnuts and concern trolling Democrats.
Week after week you can see and hear Gregory asking confrontational questions to Democrats (on those rare occasions when he has one as guest) and respectful ones to Republicans. Tim Russert was pretty bad, but at least he would ask a GOPer guest a tough questions from time to time. Rare, but it did happen.
The rule seems to be that the host of a network Sunday news show must be confrontational, rude and skeptical when speaking to Democrats, but supportive, polite and overly credulous when engaging Republicans.This is especially true in the Obama era. This fact may be why President Obama has very little use for these in-the-tank blowhards and why his Network interviews are almost always with somebody who does not host these shows. That said, he still went on the Sunday shows–all by himself–when he was a candidate.
Barack Obama was on MTP in the Russert era. This was in 2007 and pretty much every question was confrontational. Romney’s Sunday appearance on MTP will be his first in this election cycle. There is a zero chance that Mitt will face the same kind of confrontational questions that candidate Obama faced–especially with Gregory as the host and Mitt bringing along his wife to hide behind. It says something about Romney that he is too chicken shit to face–on his own–even the mild fluffing and extremely friendly softball questions he’ll get from Rove’s back-up dancer.
Gregory has yet to interview Paul Ryan as the GOP’s VP candidate, but we know how that will go when it happens. Back in May both Joe Biden and Paul Ryan were MTP guests within a few weeks of each other. The interview with Biden was what you would expect. Ryan was on with Senator Durbin and you could see Gregory’s bias in action. Ryan got one softball after another, including many, many opportunities to join Gregory in attacking Durbin, The President and Democrats.
This is how it is done by the bought-&-paid-for wankers of the Beltway. My expectations for any display of journalistic integrity from Gregory and his ilk are very, very low. Others are more hopeful and cling to the idea that the MTP host might actually morph into journalist some day. Some have gone so far as to suggest questions for Mitt.
But David Gregory is NOT a journalist (he just plays one on teevee), so it ain’t ever gonna happen…
Cheers
ps: You can now text a donation to President Obama. Dial 62262 and text GIVE. Reply YES to the confirmation text you get and your donation is added to your phone bill.
And make sure you’re registered to vote and know how to get involved in the campaign at: www.gottavote.org
Baud
I think the press was worse in the Gore-Bush race, but they are pretty bad right now.
dmsilev
Don’t forget that Mitt is bringing his wife with. Maybe, following the example set by the Alitos, she can well up with tears in the unlikely event that Gregory asks a vaguely challenging question.
Misterpuff
This is good news for John McCain, and he’ll probably pop in to pick up his weekly MTP coffee.
Maude
When Cheney said no doubt, Russert didn’t ask, who has no doubt.
Rekster
I am a huge fan of Rachel Maddow. However, last night she alluded to how Mitt would handle the “followup” questions when he was on MTP Sunday. I howled with laughter at this supposition.
Does she not know that Karl Rove’s dancing partner is the host of MTP? Did she think that she was hosting MTP?
I am sure we will all be relieved when Tim’s son will be able to claim his Birthright and restore MTP to it’s former glory/Snark
Dennis G.
@Baud: It was bad then and during the Bush years and the Clinton years, but there is another element now that seems to make it OK to disrespect the man, the office, his Party and his supporters in ways that were never acceptable when the President of lead Democratic spokesperson was white. This element of could be because of racism and/or notions of white entitlement. Or, it could just be that Gregory and his ilk are stupid.
Regardless of the reason, I think that it is worse than ever these days…
Dennis SGMM
Come November it will be four full years since I’ve clapped an eyeball on any of those Sunday morning bobble head shows that I once so avidly watched. I quit out of disappointment caused by the fact that a nation with a few hundred million people couldn’t come up with any better hosts and panelists than the toadies and assholes that were on back then.
Sounds as though I haven’t missed anything since then.
Maude
@Dennis G.:
The whole birther thing is a prime example.
MattF
Is Mitt bringing Rafalca too?
amk
Doesn’t this fucker have one of the lowest ratings for “meet
the pressyour repub”, ever ? So, why does he have this fellating job still?TheOtherWA
I only watch MTP when Rachel is on the panel. Otherwise it’s a waste of time and drives up my blood pressure.
NonyNony
@Baud:
Hm. I think I’d have to agree. Mostly I think it was because Gore didn’t know what he was up against and so tended to give the press more to work with than Obama does. Obama got to watch the press savage Clinton and then Gore (and then Kerry) and he learned from the mistakes they made in dealing with the press. So he’s made fewer mistakes on the whole. Mitt Romney is also such a horrible human being that the press’s usual “defer to powerful assholes” reflex is overridden by the powerful innately human desire to punch him in the face. W may have triggered that in Democrats, but Romney triggers it in just about everyone.
Who knows – even Gregory might end up asking a question that makes Romney stumble. Not on purpose, of course, but he might ask what for any other candidate would be a completely softball question about his love for Mom and apple pie and our soldiers in uniform and Romney might take offense and get imperious and snotty about it. I think there’s a reason why Romney doesn’t give many one on one interviews – it’s because he’s terrible at them.
OTOH, Romney’s camp probably pre-cleared all of the questions and topics that Gregory will be allowed to ask him about. So there’s less of a chance for a screw up. On the third hand, though, Romney’s camp seems to be a pack of drooling chimps when it comes to this whole “campaigning” thing, so even if they pre-cleared the questions there still might be something that Romney ends up looking like an asshole about.
jwb
You make it sound like Gregory isn’t paid to do exactly what he is doing, and it bugs me about a lot of the media criticism. Here, the problem isn’t really Gregory but the networks, whose executive have clearly made a decision to create this dynamic. Gregory is just doing what a worker usually does—although he—like all reporters in his position—is paid a fair bit more than most workers to ensure that he toes the company line.
Bruce S
This is the oldest news in the world, going back to Russert. Anyone who watches MTP deserves it.
Chris Hayes UP is THE Sunday (and Saturday) morning show, followed closely by MHP (although Melissa commits the error too often of having GOPers on for “balance” who are total idiots and a waste of time. Chris often includes conservatives, but they are almost invariably idiosyncratic, intelligent and/or interesting. Not just there to fill the empty “opposition” suit.
I will occasionally check out the panel on MTP online if Maddow is on, because she’s the only person ever on the show who brings any (polite) fire to a moribund shell of a “news” format. But the show is so “walking dead” that even with Maddow on, it’s not really worth expending precious moments of one’s life.
Davis X. Machina
This is exactly what Josh Marshall was on about when he said “Washington is wired for Republicans”.
Violet
Wasn’t there a rumor a month or so ago that Gregory was on the way out? I think it’s true, but when Ann Curry got dumped from the Today Show right before the Olympics they decided not to make too many changes all at once. It would have made the network look like it was in chaos.
I think Dancin’ Dave’s got the gig through the election, but unless ratings improve tremendously I think he’ll be out the door near the end of 2012 or first of 2013.
My dream would be for NBC to get someone who asks tough questions and makes MTP the place you HAVE to go as a candidate or you’re seen as a wimp. They’ve got shows like that in the UK on BBC and we need something like it here.
Brachiator
@Dennis SGMM:
I’ve long realized that these shows are largely wankfests where journalist insiders pretend to challenge political insiders.
But what finally did it for me was an episode of the ABC Sunday show where Paul Krugman tried to school Cokie Roberts and George Will on economics. Cokie just looked increasingly confused, but then perked up and used her Beltway Fu to derisively note that Washington politicians didn’t care about the nuances of sound economic policy and would just do what they wanted anyway, so there.
I saw then that there was absolutely no point in trying to glean any information from these shows and at best they only hinted at who was on top and who was on the outs in the pathetic little schoolyard that these wretches want to be the master of.
Ben Franklin
@jwb:
Yeah. Them ‘Golden Handcuffs’ stifle the objectivity. When the networks (eg CBS) decided not to exempt NEWS from profitability any longer, the bean-counting conservatives on the Boards fucked the newsfolks and us.
Baud
@NonyNony:
I agree that Obama is far more media savvy than Gore was. And it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Romney gets asked about his mom, and he responds that he only wants to talk about things that are important.
Amir Khalid
I think I understand now what Ann Romney will be doing on Meet The Press. Just as her husband’s campaign believes that she is the right person to reach out to women voters — and we can all see how well that’s working out for them, right? — it also believes she is the right person to bring along for an important media interview. When MTP asks Mitt a policy question, he’ll answer with “I’ll let you know after you elect me”. And Ann will chime in with “This election is all about jobs and the economy.” She will emphasize this remark by nodding seriously.
The mainstream media will proclaim the interview shows a future First Couple completely in sync with each other.
Cervantes
@Dennis SGMM: For decades I used to watch the one-then-two-then-three broadcast-Sunday-morning talkies religiously, going so far as to videotape the ones that aired simultaneously so that I wouldn’t miss anything.
Decided in 1994 to stop watching them all — and this decision I credit for what remains of my sanity.
Ben Franklin
@Ben Franklin:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/smoke/interviews/cronkite.html
Q: THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN COMMERCIAL AND CORPORATE OTHER PRESSURES IN BROADCASTING. BUT DID YOU FEEL THEM? WERE YOU AS CONSCIOUS OF THEM AS PEOPLE SEEM TO BE?
Cronkite: Not at all. Absolutely not at all. I can swear on a stack of Bibles that not once in doing the CBS Evening News for 19 years, well, I take it back. Once perhaps. But during 19 years with perhaps one exception, was I ever aware of any political or commercial pressure on that broadcast whatsoever. Now, I’m not saying that there wasn’t some at higher echelons, but within CBS News Department, we who were on the firing line were protected totally. Our backs were protected, we never heard that there was any problem of any kind in putting what we felt was necessary on the air.
Q: WHAT WAS THE EXCEPTION?
Cronkite is a former CBS News anchor and correspondent
Cronkite: The one exception was the Watergate program that we did and we had taken a sizable hunk of the broadcast, 18 or 19 minutes of a half hour broadcast to do the first of a two-part series trying to wrap up what the revelations had been in Watergate. The story was fading from the papers and we thought we needed to revive it by showing the importance of this story. People had lost the thread of it. Well, we did that and the management of CBS News came to us and said they felt that we’d taken too much time. Uh, the emphasis had been overdone and taken that much time and in doing the second piece the next day, felt we should cut it down. They’d never said anything about content at all, just time. Well, I thought that that was a decision of Dick Salant our esteemed president of CBS News. I only learned later that he was under considerable pressure from the White House as passed through Bill Paley to do something about those broadcasts. He managed to do something by simply cutting down the time a little bit. Doing nothing about the text or material. It didn’t hurt the broadcast really a bit to cut it down. We got every…all the facts in we needed.
Q: WHEN DID THE SITUATION CHANGE?
Cronkite: Well, it did not change in my time. When I stepped down from the evening news at the age of 65, in ’81, things were still going well. Immediately after that the whole tenor of the CBS News Department changed. The bosses with whom I worked and so well over the years were removed. A new set of people were brought in. I think that their standards were vastly lower, quite honestly, than the ones we had pursued.
Handy
Obviously, David Gregory and Tim Russert and the rest are all millionaires. They are not the kind of demographic to ask the hard questions of republicans or being polite to democrats.
shoutingattherain
Stopped watching 8 years ago. I’ve missed nothing.
Villago Delenda Est
@Ben Franklin:
Try “non-existent” and you’d be closer to reality.
CBS is an utter sewer now, what with hiring Frank Luntz and all.
Ben Franklin
I don’t understand how ‘not watching’ or ‘not reading is a Red Badge of Courage.
Ben Franklin
@Villago Delenda Est:
Their ‘standards’ are profitability. The Great Bean-Counter Revolution of the 80’s and 90’s made Mammon, god. It’s always been thus, except there were dikes and levees to keep them out of the NEWS. That’s what’s changed.
Anya
I am just amazed at how moronic Chuck Grassley is. It’s hard to believe that this guy is a US senator. Check out this tweet (via GOS – Why Upgrade the Senate).
Villago Delenda Est
@Ben Franklin:
The “Tiffany Network” used to be about other things than money, at least as far as the news division was concerned.
The great game show scandals of the 50’s had a positive effect…the networks realized that they had a PR problem on their hands, and suddenly the news departments were the way to restore some credibility to their brands.
Of course, all that was forgotten by the time the shitty grade Z movie star was elected to the Presidency.
Ben Franklin
@Villago Delenda Est:
I forgot about the Feds and ‘Quiz Show’. Hadn’t factored that in.
karen marie
@Ben Franklin: Sanity, my friend, sanity. I doubt that anyone in this thread who has, for however long, foregone subjecting themselves to the Sunday chat shows is not well informed about what’s going on, including about the ridiculous content of those chat shows. I had my cable cut and traded my TV for removing a truck full of garbage to the dump in 2004. My Sunday mornings, as a result, are far more pleasant.
Villago Delenda Est
@Anya:
This is pretty much what Rmoney’s campaign staff has been saying…that the criticism of his jobs creation numbers doesn’t take into account a “Romney boom” that will magically start right around 12:02 EST on 20 January 2013, give or take a few minutes.
GregB
Has there EVER been a Presidential candidate who did the show with his wife as a human shield?
Talk about looking weak to the base.
Ben Franklin
@karen marie:
I see that. For me, I want to know. Kinda like bird-flu. I’d rather not deal with it, but if it’s coming, I want to know.
karen marie
@Villago Delenda Est: This is the same ransom note put out by — who was it? — the other day when they argued that since clearly the Republicans will continue to obstruct unless they’re given the White House that we should just all vote for Romney and let the country move on.
@Ben Franklin: That’s what the internet is for. Ha!
Brachiator
@Ben Franklin:
Good point. I think that for many, including myself, these programs were appointment viewing. It’s like people I knew who once planned their Sundays around 60 Minutes.
If someone alerts me that an episode was especially good or informative, I will go back and watch the video or an audio podcast.
But the guests have learned that they can get away with evasions, and the moderators and producers love their comfortable jobs. And at the end of the day, they all want to be pals.
This brings to mind a recent public radio news story about how senior foreign diplomats from NY and Washington, congressmen and journalists all take a late summer vacation in the Hamptons, often as the guests of plutocrats. Even though I’ve long known this to be true, and even saw a little of it first hand in my college days, there was something sad about it, about having to recognize the degree to which the world still turns on an insiders’ club, and the degree to which journalists want to belong.
Ben Franklin
@Brachiator:
and the degree to which journalists want to belong.
It is sad, especially since a lot of these people got into journalism post-Woodstein, ostensibly because they were inspired. The salaries many accrue boost them into tax brackets and social circles which motivate their urgency to keep the Status Quo.
Amir Khalid
@GregB:
Mitt is already so terrified of his party’s base, he hasn’t dared to tack to the center. The party base considers this a success, in that they’ve got a candidate they can order around. Why, he’s even disowned his own suspiciously moderate past to please them. As far as looking weak to the base is concerned, there is little damage left to do.
danah gaz
w00t! We got our new idle-wheel assembly for our motor-bicycle yesterday and after tinkering and test running the thing yesterday evening and just now, I think it’s safe to say that it works. We have some minor oil seepage but haven’t torqued the head bolts or applied lock-tite yet so that’s to be expected. It runs great (although we’ll be swapping out the knobby tires for street tires for a smoother ride), and it’s really fun. Wheeee! =)
ETA: I’d like to change out the gaskets and bore the carburetor so that we can run it on ethanol – not cuz it’s greener – it’s not – but so it doesn’t smell so much. However, there are no ethanol stations here. =(
Cervantes
@Ben Franklin: Not watching David Gregory, or, for that matter, Tim Russert in his heyday, is not a badge of courage. Partly it’s a survival strategy; and partly it frees you up to watch and read stuff that can actually improve your mind — or at least your outlook.
Understand, I’m not criticizing you for continuing to pay attention to the Sunday-morning carnival — watch it if it helps you in some way comprehend the opposition — but if there’s something you think I might have missed in nearly two decades of ignoring these nitwits (and their advertisers) … what is it?
muddy
@GregB: A prophylactic human shield. Who could ask Mitt any rude questions in front of her and upset her and she has MS you know …
Turgidson
@NonyNony:
It really doesn’t take much. Even when the interviewer is taking great pains not to surprise or embarrass the guy, he finds a way.
Kathy in St. Louis
My theory on this Sunday talking head republifests is that there are so many of them that they are all fighting for the same few guests every week. McCain just can’t be everywhere, you know. So, the hosts are afraid to confront the pols or make them look bad for fear they won’t come on again. It seems pretty clear to me that most of these guests have knowledge of the questions before the show, and, who knows, maybe even approval. The fact that it’s all Republicans all the time is a little more puzzling. But when the GOPers can go on Fox and practically have the panel and host go down on them, the other programs really have to step and fetch to procure guests. Hey, procure is such an apt word, now that I think of it. They do seem to be pimping for the Republicans all the time. And Gregory is, hands down,the worst.
danah gaz
Old people watch TV news. Old people skew republican. TV “news” skews republican. One day, old people will die and nobody will remember who david gregory was.
yopd1
Have you all seen what’s trending on twitter? #DavidGregorysToughQuestions
Ben Franklin
@Cervantes:
but if there’s something you think I might have missed in nearly two decades of ignoring these nitwits (and their advertisers) … what is it?
Ulcers, is all I can think of.
Anya
@Villago Delenda Est: Yeah, he’s just repeating the RR talking point. My question is how are the people in Iowa not embarrassed that this doofus is their Senetor?
Kathy in St. Louis
@danah gaz: Speaking as an official “old people” I haven’t watched the evening news in years. I can find out whatever I need to know on the internet, whether local or national. It’s there somewhere. I couldn’t tell you who is in charge on CBS, though I know that Brian Williams is still on his gig at NBC and there is some woman on ABC who used to do the GMA show. I quit watching for my own sanity. They cover no serious matters in any depth. It’s a thirty second hit unless it’s a catastrophe. I can still read and their 30 second bits aren’t going to enlighten me all that much.
maya
Do any of those sought after “swing voters” actually watch any of these Sunday Shit Shows?
Most likely, at that early hour, 9:AM, they’re probably in the can taking an after coffee dump before F-O-O-T-B-A-L-L ! Priorities, people, priorities.
Turgidson
@karen marie:
Ramesh Ponnuru (sp?) said this.
What an endearing pitch: “We’re fucking assholes and we’ll continue to be fucking assholes, except maybe even bigger fucking assholes if we lose this election. We’re fucking assholes who hate this president with the kind of incoherent rage that only fucking assholes like us can muster. Wouldn’t you rather give power to us fucking assholes so that we’ll be slightly less of assholes? Then we’ll be unified. Under the leadership of total.fucking.assholes. Romney/Ryan 2012!”
danah gaz
@Kathy in St. Louis: I felt that it went without saying that this isn’t a universal truth, but rather a rule of thumb. =) Not all old folks are cranks either, but it certainly stands to reason that the thrust of what I was saying is arguably true when you consider for example, that Fox News is the highest rated news show by far, and is also the oldest demographic by far.
Some people still use their brains past 60. =) A plurality don’t, and they stop advancing with the times. <– these people are the ones the news shows target these days – the people who grew up trusting TV and are still inclined to despite the overwhelming evidence that TV is not to be trusted.
I was attempting to be pithy and convey my cynicism. If in doing so, I offended you (or anyone else reading this) than I apologize, sincerely. That was not my intent.
quannlace
I just never get this ‘respectful’ nonsense. These candidates are applying for the most important job in this country, so pardon us if we unworthy proles dare to ask you a few tough questions.
WaterGirl
@yopd1: link didn’t work for me
JoyfulA
@maya: I’ve been wondering all my life why these shows are timed for Sunday morning, when all of us proper people are in church. Are they doing risque jokes they don’t want proper people to hear? Might the church people notice that the pols’ words don’t track with the red letter text in the Bible if these shows came on at some other time?
I’ve been told these shows are taped on Saturday afternoons and not really on Sundays, but still. There must be some reason.
Ben Franklin
Some people still use their brains past 60. =) A plurality don’t
Baloney. It has nothing to do with age. Some believe thinking is too much like work.
That is human beings across the chronological spectrum
JoyfulA
@maya: I’ve been wondering all my life why these shows are timed for Sunday morning, when all of us proper people are in church. Are they doing risque jokes they don’t want proper people to hear? Might the church people notice that the pols’ words don’t track with the red letter text in the Bible if these shows came on at some other time?
I’ve been told these shows are taped on Saturday afternoons and not really on Sundays, but still. There must be some reason.
Ben Franklin
Some people still use their brains past 60. =) A plurality don’t
Baloney. It has nothing to do with age. Some believe thinking is too much like work.
That is human beings across the chronological spectrum
danah gaz
@Kathy in St. Louis: FYWP not taking my edits.
I was attempting to be pithy and convey my cynicism in my initial comment. If in doing so, I offended you (or anyone else reading this) than I apologize, sincerely, for my clumsy and thoughtless post. That was not my intent.
Ben Franklin
Some people still use their brains past 60. =) A plurality don’t
Baloney. It has nothing to do with age. Some believe thinking is too much like work.
That is human beings across the chronological spectrum
Ben Franklin
Some people still use their brains past 60. =) A plurality don’t
Hmmm. It has nothing to do with age. A lot of folks believe thinking is too much work; something to be avoided.
That is true across the chronological spectrum.
trnc
I love this from the NC gottavote site:
“If you’ve previously voted in a federal election in North Carolina, you don’t have to bring an ID with you to the polls.”
Because I can totally expect the poll workers to remember me from when I voted in 2010.
danah gaz
@Ben Franklin: The difference is that the younger dumbasses didn’t grow up with TV as the primary and almost singular source of entertainment and aren’t as inclined to watch it. Taken in context with the rest of what I was saying, I’d hoped that was clear. I’ve also known quite a few jagoffs that become less intellectually curious as they age, but in this case, you can consider my statement (the one you quoted) to be the most charitable possible interpretation of why they are asshats, to wit: They maybe weren’t asshats all of their lives, but grew into it later in life. I could have just said they were stupid to begin with, and I suppose in light of your reaction, maybe that would have been better.
ETA: Seniors skew republican demographically. Maybe you can explain why, if it doesn’t have to do with aging into it.
divF
@JoyfulA:
My understanding / recollection is that the Sunday morning slot for news shows came from (1) a requirement, long since vanished, that a broadcast license came with an obligation to air a certain amount of “public affairs” programming, and (2) the Sunday morning slots were the least profitable from an advertising standpoint, because there would be so few viewers (they would be at church). Therefore, air the public affairs shows (which also had trouble attracting advertising revenue because so few people watched them) on sunday morning, to minimize the overall loss of revenue.
Dennis G.
@Anya: I have in-laws in Iowa who knew him when he first ran. They described him as dumber than a bag of hammers and he hasn’t gotten any smarter…
maya
@JoyfulA: I think originally these Sunday shows were intended for a more politically curious older male crowd who didn’t go to church. Their wives did instead. I’m thinking of my grandfather who faithfully watched MTP every Sunday and the Huntley Brinkley Report on nightly news. They actually had bonafide members of the press asking questions of guests back then. (50’s-early 60’s) The moderator just shepherded the show along. Hence, Meet The Press. Notice how the press is missing from that equation today? We now get pundits and Tom Brokaw, just stringing out the terms of his lucrative War Booty bonus for selling the Iraq invasion and getting GE those billion $ no-bid contracts. Grandpa was a Republican when the term actually had some integrity.
Edit: Yeah. also what divF said.
jomike
@Rekster:
I think she was double-dog daring Gregory to ask substantive followup questions. It’s a sly way of calling him out. I think Gregory lacks the guts and the journalistic integrity to actually do it, and I think RM thinks the same. Will being called out like that by a colleague — publicly! — prompt him to grow a spine and commit actual journalism? If he does a puffball interview he’ll confirm the suspicions of a growing number of viewers. OTOH, if he accepts Maddow’s challenge he risks alienating his betters.
Kathy in St. Louis
@danah gaz: You didn’t in any way offend me. Most of my friends are in my age group and many of them are the closed minded folks to whom you refer. And, the most close-minded of all are avid Foxies. However, the liberal friends that I have send me most of the good stuff I get. I’d say that network news watching may break down more on ideological lines than age lines. Most liberals have pretty much caught on to the fact that the networks are owned by large corporations and pretty much spout the big business agenda these days, rather than being the independent arms of the networks they once were.
Bob h
Still, isn’t going on MTP a sign of desperation?
geg6
@danah gaz:
Bullshit. Over 65ers are the children of WWII and early 50s. Read some social histories of the times and you’ll quickly find out you don’t know what you seem to think you know about them. Newsflash: most young adults in the 60s were in no way, shape or form the hippies that got all the press. The hippies were a minority. Who the fuck do you think voted Nixon and Reagan into office? Jeebus, you’re ignorant of that which you claim to speak with some sort of authority.
And FYI, I work with young adults, well educated ones, who are dumber than a box of rocks about politics and current affairs. They could stand to watch or read a bit of actual journalism, but they don’t. Gaming is a bigger opium of the masses than tv ever was.
grandpa john
@karen marie: Yes this; I have no doubt that if in a once in a million event, something of importance actually gets revealed on one of these shows , I will shortly read about it here or on another blog. And I won’t have to listen to the bunch of babbling idiots that make up the very limited guest list of these shows. if I want to hear a conversation with a senile old person , I could go a nursing home, I don’t have to listen to McCain
Sunhaws
I think the interviews with both romneys have already been taped. Doesn’t sound like they will actually be in the studio. There are already some snippets released.
MazeDancer
Hoping that George Stephanopolous having Paul Ryan directly opposite MTP will set up some rivalry. And that even Gregory will have to ask at least one semi-tough question. Or at least one of them will try to top the other.
Otherwise the entire Beltway navel gazing would be that one of them actually did their job while the other didn’t. Of course, since spouting “both sides do it” and pushing Republican agendas is what the Beltway folks consider “doing their job” it’s possible I will be disappointed on hearing even that one decent question.
But, DVR’ing both shows, just in case. It is Mitt’s first non-Fox interview, there is a slight possibility Gregory will try to save his job.
Rekster
@jomike:
I hope you are correct. I wish Gregory would have a bout of diarrhea and they would have to bring Rachel in to guest host. I wonder if Mittens would stay around for that?
The Fat Kate Middleton
@Dennis G.: Your in-laws are entirely correct. I grew up in Grassley’s hometown (New Hartford, IA, pop. 410 at the time he ran), and I remember all the grownups laughing when he first ran for office. They couldn’t believe anyone that stupid would ever run, much less win. And yet, he went on to win – improbably – election after election. Ten+ years ago, he was widely viewed as a truly moderate Republican. We know better now.
kindness
Maybe it’s time for Jon Stewart to go on MTP. After all, he did us all such a favor with his appearance on Firing Line. Lightning can strike twice.
SoINeedAName48
@yopd1:
Sure have. Some Samples:
Gregory: Gov. Romney, what would you do for a Klondike Bar?
Gregory: Gov. Romney, do you like me pen? I bought it at Staples.
marindenver
If you have not read driftglass’s musings on “The Gingrich Rules” slide on over and check it out. There is no one calling out the Sunday Mouse Circus and its denizens with better clarity and snark than dg. (No offense to this place but drifty is a genius.)
SiubhanDuinne
POTUS is going to be on CBS Face the Nation tomorrow. And it was Scott Pelley who did the interview, not creaky old Bob Schieffer. Don’t know anything about Pelley except his name, but anyhow the Obama interview should be a good counterbalance to Rmoney on NBC and Lyin’ Ryan on ABC.
WaterGirl
@SiubhanDuinne: I just googled “Scott Pelley photo” and I see that he is one of the 60 minutes guys.
Cacti
David Gregory is really going to hold Mitt’s feet…
and massage them lovingly.
LanceThruster
@kindness:
It was a forgetable show to say the least but I think it was Crossfire.
Point taken though.
Stentor
Fuck David Gregory. If I ever see that dipshit in public, I’m going to back him up against a wall & tell him exactly what I think of him, Karl Rove, & the rest of his douchebag colleagues, including lil’ Luke. He’s on the list of people I will flat out punch in the mouth if I ever get the chance.
POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!! POW!!! Right In The Kisser!!!
Pavonis
@geg6:
Growing up in the late 80s/90s, I played several games which could really teach a lot about various issues governments face. For example, SimEarth and the early Civilization titles allowed a civilization to rapidly industrialize by using fossil fuels but at the cost of global warming (Sim Earth even kept track of C02 and Ch4 concentrations in the atmosphere) and it was possible to desertify large areas of land. SimCity, SimHealth, Galactic Civilizations, and various other city-builder games can teach about the balance of taxation versus spending. It is a bad idea in any of these games to always cut taxes and spending like the GOP wants because eventually your nation’s institutions will collapse. Galactic Civilizations even had a Laffer curve set to maximize income at around 70% or so but in general maintaining very high tax rates would damage long-term revenue. And there’s always the military spending issue in Civilization-style games: having too much military spending in peacetime can actually make your country much weaker in the long term (like the USSR). Seeing such things in a textbook is one thing; experiencing them in a simulation is another.