Chuck Todd, Ben Smith Whining about M...

Chuck Todd, Ben Smith Whining about MSM Not Trusted

Posted in the Columbus Forum

Enzyte Bob

Powell, OH

#1 Oct 8, 2012
1/2

CHUCK TODD, BEN SMITH LAMENT LACK OF TRUST IN INSTITUTIONS THEY HELPED DESTROY

by JOHN NOLTE 8 Oct 2012, 9:46 AM PDT 15 POST A COMMENT

There was some entertaining crybabying over the weekend. Very entertaining. Apparently, two of America's most dishonest and disreputable journalists are pretty upset over the fact that Americans no longer trust the government and the media.

This Sunday on "Meet the Press," Todd was all pained over *gasp* Americans growing suspicion that a government institution would release counter-intuitive unemployment numbers beneficial to the president just 30 days out from an election.

According to the Huffington Post, at times Todd was so upset, his voice "grew shaky":

Todd interrupted. "This is really making me crazy," he said. "The Federal Reserve gets questioned now for politics these days, the Supreme Court, John Roberts. We have corroded."

Todd lowered his voice, which grew shaky. "What we're doing, we're corroding trust in our government in a way, and one time responsible people are doing to control it. And the idea that Donald Trump and Jack Welch, rich people with crazy conspiracy, can get traction on this, is a bad trend."

First off, why would we trust any institution with someone as dishonest as a Chuck Todd for a character witness?

Chuck Todd isn't just a bad or biased journalist, he never stops lying through omission (just watch his deplorable MSNBC show), he makes things up, encourages Occupy protests against Republicans, and is a despicable race-baiter. But what it all boils down to is that Todd is a Palace Guard for The State. And because Democrats and, more specifically, Barack Obama, worship The State, Todd also sees it as his mission to protect them at all costs -- even the truth.

Just the fact that Todd is an elite member of the very profession that should be most skeptical of governmental institutions, but instead gets "shaky" over the fact that others are skeptical of it, is highly revealing. In just a few sentences Sunday, Todd bares a soul that reveals his true agenda: to protect The State.

Todd is also too stupid to understand that his unwillingness to question and investigate Obama's government has a lot to do with America's growing distrust in it. No one trusts that which isn’t being watch-dogged. As overheated as the media was to nail Bush, we could at least rest easy in the knowledge his government was being watched.

It's just a fact that today our corrupt media is infinitely more interested in Romney's taxes than the hundreds of millions of unreported donations Obama's hauling in; statements by Todd Akin get a hundred-times the coverage of Fast and Furious; the timing of something Romney said is a bigger story than security lapses in Libya and the ensuing cover up; our failing economy gets less coverage than Romney's real and invented gaffes; the president's despicable race-baiting in '07 is written off as old news by the same corrupt media that attacked Romney for cutting a guy's hair 50 years ago.

Hey, Chuck, don't cry. You simply cannot expect us to trust a government whose watch dogs have been so obviously bought off and co-opted.

Over at the anti-gay Buzzfeed Politics, of all people, Ben Smith is torn up over the fact that people don't believe in skewed polls or perfectly timed (for Obama) unemployment statistics that make no logical sense or a media that blindly bows down to both:

More of the 2012 cycle’s descents into fantasyland — the unskewing of polls and BLS paranoia most obvious among them — have featured Republicans than Democrats, prompting some on the left to argue that American conservatives have a particular hostility to reality. And certainly, the conservative movement has long nourished more skepticism of the mainstream media and of some forms of government authority than has the left.

Again, why would anyone believe in any institution with someone as unscrupulous as Ben Smith for a character witness?
Enzyte Bob

Powell, OH

#2 Oct 8, 2012
(Misposted in the GM thread)

2/2

Other than the corrupt Politico, over the last four or five years, no one has done more to destroy journalism that the BenSmithiest BenSmither in the history of BenSmithing -- Ben Smith.

Smith's entire reason for being -- which is now on steroids with his staff of BenSmithers-in-training -- is to kill anti-Obama narratives and to troll Romney and Republicans to death with nonsense-distractions. Ben Smith isn't just a degenerate left-winger who disguises himself as a "journalist" -- from an objective viewpoint he's helped make journalism even smaller and more petty than it already was. Smith is only about amplifying and weaponizing The Stupid and Meaningless to damage Republicans and protect Democrats.

One of Smith's primary calling cards at BuzzFeed is dredging up old videos of politicians, and yet he was among the first to call Obama's 2007 race-baiting video "old news." Rather than take even a few minutes to question Friday's jobs numbers, Smith's BenSmithers ran this headline against one of the most respected CEO's in American history because he dared to. This is bigger news than Obama's 2007 race-baiting, and until an update (that was really a correction) was added -- this was a bald-faced lie.

And those examples above are just from last week.

I could go back in time and run out of Internet detailing Smith's smallness, trolling, lies, and Palace Guarding.

Ben Smith is the Lex Luthor of dishonestly bad journalism, the arch-villain of everything wrong with the media today. And now he's all anguished over the pile of rubble his work and example created.

In the end, it's kind of nice to see Todd and Smith reduced to whining, especially when you consider the fact that they’re really not pleading for us to trust government and media. What they want is for us to again trust them -- their biased reporting, dishonest polls, and who they are as men.

Well, I've got a couple tips for them….

1. If these two shills want us to trust government again, I suggest they start holding government accountable regardless of which party sits in the Oval Office.

2. If these two hacks want us to trust the media again, they can start by looking for another line of work.

Plus

Sumter, SC

#3 Oct 8, 2012
Plus during the previous administration we had nothing but this type of behavior on the part of the Left, Democrats, Liberals, and the media.

Every single day they attributed every single thing that went wrong to the then President Bush. And if anything positive came out they claimed these very type things.

Every single day for 8 years and especially the last 4, the Democrats and the media did this.

And now that they're getting a dose of their own medicine, they can't handle it.
Tim

Akron, OH

#4 Oct 8, 2012
Plus wrote:
Plus during the previous administration we had nothing but this type of behavior on the part of the Left, Democrats, Liberals, and the media.
Every single day they attributed every single thing that went wrong to the then President Bush. And if anything positive came out they claimed these very type things.
Every single day for 8 years and especially the last 4, the Democrats and the media did this.
And now that they're getting a dose of their own medicine, they can't handle it.
They consider the fact that the Kucinich wing shut up for a few months after 9.11 as "civility"

Of course they released Fairenheit 9.11 and outright accused Bush of treason.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#5 Oct 8, 2012
The news media did endless stories day after day when Bush beat Al Gore for his 1st term on whether Bush and the Republicans somehow "stole" the election. This infuriated them and set the tone for a decade for how they approached attacking the President and the Republican party.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#6 Oct 8, 2012
After 9/11 and the unity wore off they began attacking and criticizing every little thing. Michael Moore even made a film claiming the 9/11 attacks to be an inside job. Some of the wacko Left joined in.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#7 Oct 8, 2012
Then as we were being attacked AGAIN, this time at the pump, as a result of it, the rest of the economy fell.

And the Left and the Democrats blamed the President for every little thing, every single day.

If gas went up a penny, it was Bush's fault. If went down a nickel, it didn't go down enough and it was Bush's fault.
Enzyte Bob

Powell, OH

#8 Oct 8, 2012
Princeton Economist: Obama Campaign Is Misrepresenting My Study on Romney's Tax Plan
8:45 AM, OCT 8, 2012 • BY JOHN MCCORMACKSingle PagePrintLarger TextSmaller TextAlerts
Last night, the Obama campaign blasted out another email claiming that Mitt Romney's tax plan would either require raising taxes on the middle class or blowing a hole in the deficit. "Even the studies that Romney has cited to claim his plan adds up still show he would need to raise middle-class taxes," said the Obama campaign press release. "In fact, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein and Princeton economist Harvey Rosen both concede that paying for Romney’s tax cuts would require large tax increases on families making between $100,000 and $200,000."

But that's not true. Princeton professor Harvey Rosen tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD in an email that the Obama campaign is misrepresenting his paper on Romney's tax plan:

I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.

You can check the math that shows Romney's plan is mathematically possible here.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#9 Oct 8, 2012
On top of all this we were at war, and the Democrats would've b*tched if we'd won it in 2 days even if we did it with out any casualties. Everything was the Presidents fault, every single thing. Report in it how ever you have to to make Bush look bad.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#10 Oct 8, 2012
Then Bush's run for reelection came up, and he won. This is where/when the Left, the Democrats, and the News Media went all out nuts because they couldn't handle it. To whatever level they attacked and reported on the news against Bush before, they went full tilt overboard after he got reelected.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#11 Oct 8, 2012
Then came the actual turning point, the point where ever since we have struggled.

Everything I just mentioned had happened or was currently going on and our country was struggling.

Then Hurricane Katrina hit. And for whatever reason the bull sh*t markets decided to take even more advantage of us all than they were before. All the while the Left and the Democrats ratcheted up their attacks not only over the price of gas but every single thing associated with the disaster.

Anyway, it didn't take long for the economy to be affected. Everything was going through the roof price wise. Credit card debt shot up. And people stopped spending.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#12 Oct 8, 2012
The housing market soon fell, propped up by people in houses way above their head. This was result of both people's choosing and the government years prior making it lax on everybody to get houses more than what they could really afford.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#13 Oct 8, 2012
Then the banks and investments went south.

And not far after, unemployment slowly started to rise.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#14 Oct 8, 2012
And the Democrats were relentless, if unemployment went up .01% they criticized and blamed the President. Same for everything else.
Plus

Sumter, SC

#15 Oct 8, 2012
Then comes Obama, in their minds the great savior, the anti-Bush, the opposite of Bush. They were so caught up in their hatred for Bush and Republicans they didn't even bother vetting or weeding out Obama in their own Democrat Party's primary. They ushered in Obama because it was historical and he was the opposite of Bush. And Obama made great promises, huge ones. He was going to make it better, but he didn't. He took it and he made it worse. Worse and worse. And today when everyone gives the Democrats and Obama the same dose of medicine that they constantly gave Bush in the 2000's they can't handle it.
Enzyte Bob

Powell, OH

#16 Oct 8, 2012
Plus wrote:
Then comes Obama, in their minds the great savior, the anti-Bush, the opposite of Bush. They were so caught up in their hatred for Bush and Republicans they didn't even bother vetting or weeding out Obama in their own Democrat Party's primary. They ushered in Obama because it was historical and he was the opposite of Bush. And Obama made great promises, huge ones. He was going to make it better, but he didn't. He took it and he made it worse. Worse and worse. And today when everyone gives the Democrats and Obama the same dose of medicine that they constantly gave Bush in the 2000's they can't handle it.
To me the best thing about all this is the arrogance and hubris of a guy who got into Harvard and Columbia on C-grades and white guilt, without much achievement to show for after law school, thinking he knows more about any important issue than his advisors who are experts in the field. And these shallow liberals lapped it all up.

I wouldn't care so much about the C-grades if he had some life experience and the libs weren't having multiple orgasms over how smart the guy was. C-students often are bored to death by bookwork, but thrive when they get to interract with people. They are smart, some off the charts smart, just not in a way that can be traditionally measured.

But if Barry had those abilities, he would have had something more on his resume to show for it, don't you think?

At the end of the day, the people who got duped by this guy were no more people of substance than your average person voting on an American Idol contestant. It was more of a follow the crowd statement ... reminds me a lot of "Bonfire of the Vanities" and the way Dan Akroyd is shunned by the "in crowd" in "Trading Places".

People with money and career success can be just as shallow and ignorant as those without.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ohio School Prayer Ballot Issue Rejected 11 min d pants 54
News Columbus veteran, ousted for sexual orientation... 15 min Duke for Mayor 10
4147 Anna Maria Dr is a grow house 15 min Big Johnson 11
Where will you go if Topix goes 404? 18 min Zeeba 6
News Chipotle adding chorizo at Columbus restaurants... 21 min They cannot kill ... 1
News Sasquatch Watch searches for Bigfoot in W.Va. |... (Oct '09) 21 min UTrashy 40
Hillary's speech - thread is missing 21 min Male 144
Topix Closes Human Sexuality Forums 12 hr Posting as myself 30

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages