Nightline co-anchor Terry Moran appeared on the Media Bistro's "Morning Media Menu" podcast on Friday and simultaneously defended an ABC colleague and attacked Rush Limbaugh.
While telling host Steve Krakauer that White House correspondent Jake Tapper has been unfairly criticized by liberals for being tough on the Obama administration, he noted conservative praise for the journalist. Moran complained: "If Tapper was covering Bush, Limbaugh would call him a traitor. And that's just the way it is."
See "Media Morning Menu" for audio: www.mediabistro.com
Moran did add: "And it's not just Limbaugh, it's the other side too." But that is still a rather harsh charge to level against the radio talk show host. He also trotted out the standard journalist talking point that "no matter what you do, one side or the other is going to detest you." It's hard to imagine many liberals being too upset with Moran, however. He has developed quite a habit of fawning over Barack Obama. In another Media Bistro podcast, on February 20, he compared the President to George Washington and said that the White House was a "step down" for the new Commander in Chief.
"I like to say that, in some ways, Barack Obama is the first President since George Washington to be taking a step down into the Oval Office," the Nightline co-anchor gushed. See a February 23, 2009 CyberAlert posting for more: www.mrc.org
[This item, by the MRC's Scott Whitlock, was posted Friday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: www.newsbusters.org]
[Special thanks to MRC intern Mike Sargent for transcribing the exchange.]
A partial transcript of the April 10 podcast follows:
STEVE KRAKAUER: You know, the last time we talked, in February, got a little pick-up over at the Rush Limbaugh show. You never really know what does it, as far as why things get picked up or by who, and what aspects of things they pull out. But what was your reaction to what the focus of what Rush Limbaugh had there?
MORAN: Well, you know, I was a White House correspondent for five and a half years at the end of Bill Clinton's White House, and through the first term and more of George W. Bush's, and one thing you learn very quickly is, you have to develop a very thick hide. Because no matter what you do, one side or the other is going to detest you. I mean look at the way, right now, some of the liberal commentators are going after Jake Tapper. Tapper is an outstanding, outstanding White House correspondent. The only reason that Limbaugh is praising him is because, you know, he's giving it pretty good to the White House, when appropriate, and it's a Democratic White House. If Tapper was covering Bush, Limbaugh would call him a traitor. And that's just the way it is. And it's not just Limbaugh, it's the other side too. I mean, whenever you challenge a White House, as you should, the other side, the supporters of that White House will assume that you're wrongly motivated. And that just- that just comes with the territory, and I think no matter what you say about any major political figure, one side or the other is not going to be happy.
GLYNNIS MACNICOL: You know, we didn't mind getting picked up by Rush Limbaugh. So feel free [laughing] to say something that lands us there again.
MORAN: You know, I have a tendency, I'm afraid, sometimes to speak in ways that provoke, and I guess I รข€" that's something I have to work on, the Lord isn't finished with me yet.
MACNICOL: Well we appreciated it. We're fans of thought-provoking Menu podcasts.
From: A usually-daily report, edited by Brent H. Baker, CyberAlert is distributed by the Media Research Center, the leader since 1987 in documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias.
Love CyberAlert, the Media Research Center, News Busters...
Showing posts with label mainstream. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mainstream. Show all posts
Monday, April 13, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
WashPost Reporter on MSNBC: GOP Nominee Must 'Stand Up to Rush'
At the top of the 12PM EST hour of MSNBC news coverage on Tuesday, anchor David Shuster spoke with Washington Post reporter Keith Richburg about the recent divide between Rush Limbaugh and RNC Chair Michael Steele. Richburg observed: "You know, it's fascinating. It's like the circular firing squad. I mean, maybe this is what Rush had in mind when he was talking about 'Operation Chaos.'" Shuster later asked Richburg: "I mean, when Rush Limbaugh says that all Republicans want President Obama to fail. What's so difficult with somebody saying, 'no, no, we think that his policies may fail, but we don't want them to fail.' What's so difficult about that?" Richburg replied: "...it almost seems like the Republican Party needs a 'Sister Solja' moment...It seems like the Republicans need somebody who's willing to stand up and say Rush doesn't represent all of the views of the Republican Party and then not rush and apologize to him...I'll bet you whoever does that could end up as the, you know, the nominee of the party or at least the major party."
[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Richburg went on to describe the problem with the Republican Party: "One of the main problems they have is they're almost like the British conservative party was after Tony Blair took over in 1997. They're looking out of touch. They're older. They're whiter. They're more regionally based in south than ever before. And they're in danger of irrelevance unless they can find some way to do really what Ronald Reagan did, which was appeal to moderates, appeal to Democrats, appeal to those Macomb County, Michigan suburbs. And, you know, if you just go for a straight base strategy, conservative strategy like Rush Limbaugh is saying, you're going to lose that, kind of, center ground there."
Here is the full transcript of the March 3 segment:
12:00PM TEASE:
DAVID SHUSTER: Following the latest Republican Party civil war. A complete about-face by Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, after calling Rush Limbaugh's show 'ugly' and 'incendiary.' Steele's now apologized in the face of a withering attack from the radio host.
12:04PM SEGMENT:
CONTESSA BREWER: Rush Limbaugh isn't happy with his party's new chairman. He's not keeping quiet about it. David Shuster has that story from the politics desk. Hey, David.
DAVID SHUSTER: Contessa, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele is having second thoughts about taking on conservative power house Rush Limbaugh. Steele is apologizing for calling the radio host a mere 'entertainer,' who's show is sometimes 'ugly' and 'incendiary.' Limbaugh did not take to kindly to Steele's criticism, he lashed out at Steele on his radio show yesterday.
RUSH LIMBAUGH: I'm not in charge of the Republican Party and I don't want to be. I would be embarrassed to say that I'm in charge of the Republican Party in a sad sack state that it's in. If I were chairman of the Republican Party given the state that it's in, I would quit.
SHUSTER: Keith Richburg is New York bureau chief for The Washington Post. Keith, what do you make of all of this?
KEITH RICHBURG: You know, it's fascinating. It's like the circular firing squad. I mean, maybe this is what Rush had in mind when he was talking about 'Operation Chaos.' What you're seeing is a fight, really, for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. On the one hand, you've got Michael Steele, who's trying to re-brand it, if you will, make it more palatable to minorities, make it more diverse, make it more appealing to moderates, and on the other hand, you have Rush Limbaugh, who gave that fiery, incendiary speech to the conservative wing of the party, basically saying 'no, we don't want to change. We want to be, you know, true to our beliefs.' And that -- and whoever wins that fight is going to determine, kind of, which direction the party goes.
SHUSTER: I'm a little bit surprised. I mean, you can -- you can criticize narrowly, I would think, some of what Rush says, right?
RICHBURG: Absolutely.
SHUSTER: I mean, when Rush Limbaugh says that all Republicans want President Obama to fail. What's so difficult with somebody saying, 'no, no, we think that his policies may fail, but we don't want them to fail.' What's so difficult about that?
RICHBURG: Absolutely. And it shouldn't be. I'm really surprised about the Steele apology, because there's nothing he said in there that I found particularly outrageous. Rush Limbaugh's on the radio, he's an entertainer. Some of the things he said is ugly and incendiary. Exhibit A is 'Barack the magic Negro' that got air time on Limbaugh's radio station. And you know, it almost seems like the Republican Party needs a 'Sister Solja' moment, you know, when Bill Clinton was able to stand up and break with the far left of the Democratic Party by criticizing rap music on Sister Solja. It seems like the Republicans need somebody who's willing to stand up and say Rush doesn't represent all of the views of the Republican Party and then not rush and apologize to him.
SHUSTER: And who is that person? I mean, is it a Ron Paul, is it somebody who's perhaps a little more self-confident of themselves? I mean, who is it?
RICHBURG: That's a really good question. And you know the -- you know, we don't predict in this business, but I'll bet you whoever does that could end up as the, you know, the nominee of the party or at least the major party. You know, the problem -- they almost -- you know, we're talking about Gordon Brown. One of the main problems they have is they're almost like the British conservative party was after Tony Blair took over in 1997. They're looking out of touch. They're older. They're whiter. They're more regionally based in south than ever before. And they're in danger of irrelevance unless they can find some way to do really what Ronald Reagan did, which was appeal to moderates, appeal to Democrats, appeal to those Macomb County, Michigan suburbs. And, you know, if you just go for a straight base strategy, conservative strategy like Rush Limbaugh is saying, you're going to lose that, kind of, center ground there. So that's what this is all about. Which way does the party go to recover? The same way the British conservative party took a dozen years to try to figure this out.
SHUSTER: Keith Richburg, New York bureau chief of The Washington Post. Keith, thanks for coming on.
RICHBURG: Thank you.
The above was in www.mediaresearch.org CyberAlert
[This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
Richburg went on to describe the problem with the Republican Party: "One of the main problems they have is they're almost like the British conservative party was after Tony Blair took over in 1997. They're looking out of touch. They're older. They're whiter. They're more regionally based in south than ever before. And they're in danger of irrelevance unless they can find some way to do really what Ronald Reagan did, which was appeal to moderates, appeal to Democrats, appeal to those Macomb County, Michigan suburbs. And, you know, if you just go for a straight base strategy, conservative strategy like Rush Limbaugh is saying, you're going to lose that, kind of, center ground there."
Here is the full transcript of the March 3 segment:
12:00PM TEASE:
DAVID SHUSTER: Following the latest Republican Party civil war. A complete about-face by Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, after calling Rush Limbaugh's show 'ugly' and 'incendiary.' Steele's now apologized in the face of a withering attack from the radio host.
12:04PM SEGMENT:
CONTESSA BREWER: Rush Limbaugh isn't happy with his party's new chairman. He's not keeping quiet about it. David Shuster has that story from the politics desk. Hey, David.
DAVID SHUSTER: Contessa, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele is having second thoughts about taking on conservative power house Rush Limbaugh. Steele is apologizing for calling the radio host a mere 'entertainer,' who's show is sometimes 'ugly' and 'incendiary.' Limbaugh did not take to kindly to Steele's criticism, he lashed out at Steele on his radio show yesterday.
RUSH LIMBAUGH: I'm not in charge of the Republican Party and I don't want to be. I would be embarrassed to say that I'm in charge of the Republican Party in a sad sack state that it's in. If I were chairman of the Republican Party given the state that it's in, I would quit.
SHUSTER: Keith Richburg is New York bureau chief for The Washington Post. Keith, what do you make of all of this?
KEITH RICHBURG: You know, it's fascinating. It's like the circular firing squad. I mean, maybe this is what Rush had in mind when he was talking about 'Operation Chaos.' What you're seeing is a fight, really, for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. On the one hand, you've got Michael Steele, who's trying to re-brand it, if you will, make it more palatable to minorities, make it more diverse, make it more appealing to moderates, and on the other hand, you have Rush Limbaugh, who gave that fiery, incendiary speech to the conservative wing of the party, basically saying 'no, we don't want to change. We want to be, you know, true to our beliefs.' And that -- and whoever wins that fight is going to determine, kind of, which direction the party goes.
SHUSTER: I'm a little bit surprised. I mean, you can -- you can criticize narrowly, I would think, some of what Rush says, right?
RICHBURG: Absolutely.
SHUSTER: I mean, when Rush Limbaugh says that all Republicans want President Obama to fail. What's so difficult with somebody saying, 'no, no, we think that his policies may fail, but we don't want them to fail.' What's so difficult about that?
RICHBURG: Absolutely. And it shouldn't be. I'm really surprised about the Steele apology, because there's nothing he said in there that I found particularly outrageous. Rush Limbaugh's on the radio, he's an entertainer. Some of the things he said is ugly and incendiary. Exhibit A is 'Barack the magic Negro' that got air time on Limbaugh's radio station. And you know, it almost seems like the Republican Party needs a 'Sister Solja' moment, you know, when Bill Clinton was able to stand up and break with the far left of the Democratic Party by criticizing rap music on Sister Solja. It seems like the Republicans need somebody who's willing to stand up and say Rush doesn't represent all of the views of the Republican Party and then not rush and apologize to him.
SHUSTER: And who is that person? I mean, is it a Ron Paul, is it somebody who's perhaps a little more self-confident of themselves? I mean, who is it?
RICHBURG: That's a really good question. And you know the -- you know, we don't predict in this business, but I'll bet you whoever does that could end up as the, you know, the nominee of the party or at least the major party. You know, the problem -- they almost -- you know, we're talking about Gordon Brown. One of the main problems they have is they're almost like the British conservative party was after Tony Blair took over in 1997. They're looking out of touch. They're older. They're whiter. They're more regionally based in south than ever before. And they're in danger of irrelevance unless they can find some way to do really what Ronald Reagan did, which was appeal to moderates, appeal to Democrats, appeal to those Macomb County, Michigan suburbs. And, you know, if you just go for a straight base strategy, conservative strategy like Rush Limbaugh is saying, you're going to lose that, kind of, center ground there. So that's what this is all about. Which way does the party go to recover? The same way the British conservative party took a dozen years to try to figure this out.
SHUSTER: Keith Richburg, New York bureau chief of The Washington Post. Keith, thanks for coming on.
RICHBURG: Thank you.
The above was in www.mediaresearch.org CyberAlert
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
