Tuesday, October 31, 2006

More commentary on Chris matthews & MSNBC in regards to the offensive comments made by John Kerry



Why deceive the viewers by reporting an biased viewpoint that is more an EDITORIAL than an objective reporting of the FACTS???

Tucker Carlson had access to the video, why didn't Chris Matthews?

Why was Matthews allowed to present his OPINION as if it were FACT?

Chris Matthews was censoring a Republican commentator, while helping a Democratic commentator continue to lie about what Kerry actually said!!

IF Chris Matthews wanted to offer an OPINION, why didn't he say so - rather than say that only his way of looking at Kerry's comments is the RIGHT one, and to disagree with him is to be WRONG???

Why was Matthews allowed to keep someone with an opposing view from expressing that view? Chris Matthews was practically berating the Republican commentator, implying that he must be stupid if he couldn't understand what Kerry MEANT TO SAY rather than accepting at face value WHAT KERRY ACTUALLY SAID???

Why was the Democratic commentator allowed to speak freely while his Republican opponent was being prevented from speaking freely by Matthews (who was talking over him, bullying him, implying he was either wrong or stupid) and allowing the Democratic commentator, who was acting as a "tag team" partner for matthews in the censoring attack on the opposing view???

It is said that the first casualty in any war is the TRUTH... and that's what Matthews was allowed to do in his "report" on what John Kerry said yesterday.

It's a terrible shame for a network that is supposedly about objective journalism to allow such biased opinions to taint a report and to actually lie about the factual events of the incident being reported on.

I keep coming back to my question of "why didn't he show the tape?", but I also want to know why he didn't at least admit that it is POSSIBLE that he is WRONG and that Kerry actually DID what he's being asked to apologize for???

Here's what matters in this situation:

It's isn't what Kerry MEANT to say, it's that he said things that people took as him insulting the Troops!

There is NO WAY POSSIBLE that Chris Matthews can say that the comments were totally misunderstood - because EVEN THE PEOPLE THAT WERE AT THE EVENT where Kerry said the comment in question took Kerry's words in a bad way!!!

You can CLEARLY hear the crowd make "boo" sounds and otherwise making a negative opinion sound to what Kerry had said. So... to THEM it sure sounded like Kerry had just insulted the intelligence of our Troops - why can't Chris Matthews at least remain OBJECTIVE when reporting the news & allow room for an opposing view to what he believes?

Sure, once you EXAMINE Kerry's words for a long time... you can see what he actually MEANT to say - but didn't say properly. It's the REASONABLE conclusion that Kerry was INTENDING for people to see the subject of the comment as being the President - AFTER YOU TAKE ENOUGH TIME TO GO OVER THE WORDS MORE THAN A FEW TIMES - but if you just take the words at face value by listening to them 1 time, you get another impression than the one Kerry (and Mathews) wants people to believe.

And it's dishonest for Matthews to say that the people can get the correct interpretation of the comment SOLELY from Matthews reading what the A.P. reported that Kerry said!!! If Matthews didn't see the video (which I KNOW he did, but didn't allow his viewers to see) then he couldn't POSSIBLY put the comment in the proper context or emotional mood.

Instead, what Matthews did by reading it in the tone he BELIEVES Kerry had MEANT them to be taken... he has altered the context of the factual nature of the event, which by definition makes his report to be an UNTRUE account of the event in question.

So, if he presented a erroneous account of the event, Matthews can't tell anyone who disagrees with him that they are wrong.


It doesn't matter what John Kerry had MEANT to say, or even what Chris Matthews BELIEVES that Kerry MEANT to say... what matters is how people received the words THAT WERE ACTUALLY SAID.

If someone is offended by Kerry's comment, then NOBODY can say that the offended person is wrong!!

And if Republicans (like the President) consider those words to be an insult to the Troops, then it MUST be considered that Kerry DID make offensive comments!!


If the people who were present when Kerry made the comments in question made sounds that expressed a negative reception of his comments - then someone like Chris Matthews who are so removed from the actual context of the event because they didn't witness it firsthand, or even see the video of the event - it becomes IMPOSSIBLE for a person like Chris matthews to be able to tell another person that their opposing OPINION is absolutely WRONG because Matthews has the CORRECT opinion!

News reporters are supposed to be NEUTRAL, UNBIASED, and REMOVED from expressing their opinion when they report the news. You can't be objective when you tell someone who disagrees with you on what someone else MEANT TO SAY in a speech that neither person witnessed!!

I challenge MSNBC to denounce the biased opinions of Chris matthews when he reported his viewpoint as fact without allowing any consideration for an oposing view!

I challenge MSNBC to call for Chris Matthews to apologize for abandoning his duties as a reporter when he allowed his opinion to taint what should have been an objective unbiased reporting of what actually happened!!!

If MSNBC & Matthews refuse to accept this challenge, then I call for you to post a disclaimer at the beginning of Hardball and repeat the disclaimer when returning from commercial - the disclaimer should state that the program is NOT a news program, but an hour long EDITORIAL of Matthew's OPINIONS and it should also state whether MSNBC shares the views of Matthews, or not!!!

To not do so would show the world that MSNBC is no better than FOX News when they forward the conservative Republican viewpoint every chance they can!!!

This is "gut check time" for Matthews & MSNBC. We will see if either Matthews or MSNBC has even 1 ounce of INTEGRITY left at all.