Fri Jun 8, 2012, 09:25 AM
Mass (24,633 posts)
John Stewart's retort to Scarborough's attack on the NYTimes.
Last edited Fri Jun 8, 2012, 07:10 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)
Some of you may have followed this ludicrous attack on the NYTimes by Joe Scarborough yesterday (I think). Amazing how history is rewritten, though it should not be surprising. In addition to the article the NYTimes provided, some may remember the series of articles written by Jodi Wilgoren, including one about his "butler", articles written in a way that was following the meme (that Kerry was out of touch with ordinary people).
http://www.salon.com/2012/06/07/joe_scarborough_says_new_york_times_is_thin_skinned_for_correcting_his_nonsense/singleton/ (video at the link)
Joe Scarborough says New York Times is “thin skinned” for correcting his nonsense
Joe Scarborough may have been totally, utterly, completely wrong this morning, when he incorrectly argued, based solely on his own general, vague impressions, that the New York Times was treating Mitt Romney fundamentally differently than it had treated earlier Democratic candidates, but, you know, Joe Scarborough doesn’t really care. He is still right in his gut.
What happened is that on the “Morning Joe” show this morning, sponsored by the awful burned coffee company, Morning Joe Scarborough angrily rambled at length about a Times story – on the front page of the Home section — about Mitt Romney’s big, tacky house, and how his neighbors hate him and he is always calling the cops on people who smoke weed on the beach. The main problem is, Romney bought a big, expensive house by the beach, and then decided to quadruple its size, and predictably his neighbors have complaints about this. (His neighbors also have complaints about how Mitt Romney wants to ban gay adoption, because many of his neighbors are gay.)
This made Joe Scarborough mad for about 20 minutes, that this story was published, because in his imagination the New York Times would never publish a story like this about a liberal. That is false, obviously, as the Times pointed out a bit later in a statement that linked to four separate 2004 stories about … John Kerry being super rich. You and I may remember a veritable sea of coverage of Kerry’s prodigious wealth, from basically every source imaginable. In the world of Joe Scarborough, the Times never broached the subject, because of liberal bias.
So faced with actual concrete proof that the Times had repeatedly and critically covered Kerry’s wealth (and the homes it bought him), Scarborough has decided that the New York Times is being “defensive” and “thin skinned” by … rebutting him.
MSNBC talker doesn't let facts get in the way of his "general impressions" of liberal media bias
What I found interesting is that the rebuttal of this was in the Daily Show, and some of you may find this interesting (John Stewart rarely references Kerry except to make fun of him).
3 replies, 1154 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Response to Mass (Original post)
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 10:53 PM
wisteria (18,355 posts)
3. I agree with you. Thanks for posting this.
I was watching MJ that morning and thought how unfair it was for Joe S to even bring up JK. It makes my stomach hurt to think how so many Republicans are now defending Romneywhen they know what a sleeze he is.