Reply #73: I have seen telling signs that Olberman

[PATRICK]

is not quite the pro one would wish for, but that is epidemic in today's media. He admits to not researching mind numbing statistics. Well, you get someone reliable not a WH think tank to spin the other way something you didn't get in the first place. He is not alone in that by any means.

I don't think he, or any anchor is totally in control or even in touch with the editor or production elements that serve as his writers, directors or go betweens and assumes the magisterial WE is one in mind and purpose- and that oneness is consummate professionalism.

Whoever has pretensions(We all do) it seems the onus to "handle it" belongs on the journalist who should never make a story out of reporting the story. That is foolish circular unprofessional ism and venting quickly on the Net brings the mighty low every time.

I could go on about Bev but she has little to fault here except for trying to trust this mushmuckraker opportunity to begin with. She is the issue story researcher, not the journalist or the candidate challenger.
The SBVFT got into hot water because of their lies, but the media was very poor in directing questions of a pro nature to them. Bev couldn't get to first base so who knows what anyway except that Olberman needs a lot of input to begin using that great brain. Apparently his staff is more concerned about his cosmetics than research.

Such are the meager tools for moving a buried tale of electoral woe. The silence is the problem, not the individuals trying to work in the general dark, which as we well know is very unnerving for all.