Comment by Fools on the Hill

actually, i disagree. i watch cable “news”, when comedians like Jon Stewert or other show them. They (cable newscaster) are really funny… LOL

http://www.knoxviews.com/node/4081

Dear Norah O’Donnell,
I have watched you as a reporter and correspondent for several years now. I used to hold you and John King in the highest esteem for your sincere and objective reporting.

So you can imagine my shock, awe, and disgust at seeing this:
O’Donnell Tells Leahy: ‘You’re Going To Get The Truth From Karl Rove’

What the hell happened? Are you all of a sudden a republican plant? Who the fu#k are you to assert, as a goddam reporter, that anyone is going to get the truth out of anyone else, much less Karl Rove? Where in the dungeons of sanity do you find it your place to make such a claim, not even to mention the absurdly willfull ignorance of the claim itself. ‘You are going to get the truth out of the administration. You don’t trust the white house, you don’t trust the white house.’ Parroting right wing talking points.. ’show trial,’ ‘ratings mission,’ ‘courtroom atmosphere’. I am dumbfounded as to how you are able to get away with this. Not only do I turn my tv off when I see this Rush Limbaugh style tabloid media crap, but I bury my remote control so I can’t find it again.

On the point of the claim itself, I am seriously crazy with curiosity as to what leads you to believe or assert that the white house would be honest. Based on what would you assert that? Please, point to a fact, some relevant instance where they were forthright, honest and responsible. Was it weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Was it Saddam Hussein’s ties to 9/11? Was it that the Iraq campaign would be a matter of months not years? Was it that we would be greeted as liberators? Was it that Iraq’s oil revenue would pay for the reconstruction? Was it that having 200,000 ground troops to stabilize the country was laughable? Was it that the term civil war should be laughed as applied to Iraq? Was it that senior white house officials had nothing to do with the Valerie Plame leak? Was it that they had nothing to do with wickedly suspicious firings of a group of US attornies? What is your emotional assertion based on? What track record, what evidence, what support, what anecdotal shred of real life events is your propaganda that the white house should be unquestionably trusted can you point to? Trust is only earned. Why should I need to tell you this?

This administration is a mockery, on it’s face, of decency, democracy, integrity, justice, rule of law, and even basic adult behavior. Everyone knows it, here and all over the world. Things like extorsion, racketeering, lying and murder used to seem like really bad things that adults just shouldn’t do. But this abomination of an administration is making those things seem ok, and normal. That is very bad.

Why don’t you check out this little clip, and then tell me how we should trust this godforsaken administration. Fake, comedy news should not be more materially substantive than the actual supposed real news, that has tons of money to spend on it.

Totally pissed,
Joey LA area

There’s just a couple of problems with this……

a) Norah has not demonstrated anything close to this degree of savy in the past – ever.
b) The defensive expression on her face, the offensive tone in her voice, and the fact that she was rude enough not to thank the Senator for his time/appearance once the “interview” ended screams right-wing bias.

Her laugh is as phoney and mistimed as her role of “journalist” for MSNBC is misplaced.

I agree with other posters….

There’s a bottle of peroxide, and a kiss on the cheek from Roger Ailes in her future.

But speaking of stupidity, I can’t get over the WH’s conditions for letting Rove and Miers speak. Especially since GWB talked about getting at the facts. Somebody should ask Tony Snow, if they can’t ask you-know-who himself: how is an “interview” with a WH aide, behind closed doors, without an oath, without a recording or transcript to refer to to check on who said what, a MORE effective way of discovering the truth than public testimony under oath?

As for Miers, just think, she might have been a Supreme Court Justice.

And as for Rove, James C. Moore, co-author of Bush’s Brain, has a good essay in the LA Times:

But I still want Rove to testify publicly, under oath. And if his boss is so afraid to let him do so, we just might have something to go on.