Did anyone else see John King's interview of Holbrooke and Petraeus?

[jenmito]

He spent a large amount of his time trying to pit Petraeus against Obama, Holbrooke against Petraeus, Petraeus against Cheney, and on and on. He went so far as to show Petraeis clips of Obama saying he was against the surge, showing clips of Cheney saying he thought Obama was making us less safe, etc., getting his and Holbrooke's reactions. To their credit, Petraeus AND Holbrooke refused to take the bait. But he tried his best to cause division between Obama, Petraeus, and Holbrooke. :eyes:

[ErinBerin84]

1. I only saw part of it

When Holbrooke was talking about the Bush administration, and John King said "Well, you keep talking about the Bush administration, and I don't want to look back. Now, let's take a look at what Obama said one year ago-". WTF, that doesn't constitute looking back too? John King is competing with David Gregory for douche of the year award.

[jenmito]

2. He's so transparent I can see through him...

he was fully prepared with video clips to show Obama's "changing positions," but when he interviewed Cheney, no video to be found. No follow-up questions, even. :eyes:

[ErinBerin84]

6. John King should be absolutely ashamed of that Cheney interview

But something tells me he isn't.

[jenmito]

10. He's so proud of it he keeps showing clips of it

to show others. :eyes:

[BlueJac]

3. These programs are shit..........

I would rather watch paint dry.

[asjr]

4. Where the media are concerned I can't

remember just when it started being about the journalists, pundits, anchor people, and stopped being about our country, our government and really important things. Of all the people on T.V. John King is just about the lousiest.

[jenmito]

9. Yeah. And then he interviewed Mitch McConnell and let him get away with the BS line

that we're safer because we fought them over there so we don't have to fight them over here talking about al Qaeda in IRAQ. :eyes:

[asjr]

12. That line, taken by most Repubs. is

getting so old we might be able to manufacture our own penicillin with it.

[jenmito]

13. Yeah, but they are still getting away with it thanks to people like John King

and others in the "liberal" media.

[Hamlette]

16. reporters see their job as trying to make news, by catching a politician/public figure

in an inconsistency or to get them to say something "new". They think that is what getting the story is all about. Attend a press conference, ask a gotcha question, get a soundbite for the TV news. That makes the journalist a "star".

I fear that loss of print newspapers will leave us with nothing but TV journalists who are more concerned with instant fame than with getting the story. No more Woodward and Bernsteins. Which, after what the media did to Clinton (remember it was an in depth, 6 part "expose" of Watergate in the NYTimes that gave cover to the crazies who launched that coup attempt) I thought was a good thing.

I didn't see the King interview but I've seen dozens just like it. Tim Russert looks good by comparison and in retrospect. At least he sometimes informed ppl about inconsistencies.

I'd like to think the Internet will help. That there are many of us who know the truth. Then I see the likes of Glenn Beck and wonder what the hell is wrong with ppl that they can listen to that drivel.

[CBR]

5. I turned to it for a second and Dana Bash was on the panel...

that is something I have a problem with. When, for example, Carville and Matlin (sp?) are on the same panel it is made very clear that they are married. I wish my husband would be involved in my assessment as an analyst -- I might do well.

[CaliLiberal]

8. John King is a moron

and CNN wonders why their ratings are down.

[Pirate Smile]

7. John King makes Wolf look good.

[jenmito]

11. And that says a LOT!

[FlyByNight]

14. John King is a hack

That "interview" with Dick Cheney was proof enough. For beltway reporters, it's all about access and he's no exception.

:puke:

[jenmito]

15. I know...

but you'd think they'd stop sucking up to the Repubs. who are no longer in power.

[joanski0]

17. John King doesn't seem to realize that General

Petraeus has a new Commander-in-Chief, President Obama.

[jenmito]

18. I don't think he's too bothered by the facts...

he just likes starting trouble.

[FrenchieCat]

19. He is paid to create news if he can.

that is the ultimate goal.

provide fodder for the next few news days.

It's all very painfully clear to see to anyone with enough calmness to watch.
I'm no longer so calm about it though.....cause it is frustrating as all hell.

[jenmito]

20. I agree...

because if he CAN create some "news" they will replay it a million times on their network and get different "strategists'" opinions of it. :eyes:

[Leopolds Ghost]

21. SHOULDN'T there be? Obama was against the surge, so... why isn't anyone pushing to end Iraq?

No, as usual Americans including here on the Internet are waiting for the death toll to trail off nicely so they can claim Iraq sorted itself out without having to take a moral stand and reverse course in public.