Friday, September 08, 2006

Hardball: Chris Matthews Whiffs on Plame-gate

I just discovered a site called NewsBusters which seems to be in business to expose leftist bias in the MSM. Good gig. These days, it's full time employment. NewsBusters has an interesting bit today on TV's most obnoxious gasbag, MSNBC's Chris Matthews.

Matthews has been fulminating for what seems like years about the perfidious Bushies and their vicious outing of the not-so-secret Valerie Plame, who in turn has been promoted 24/7 by blabbermouth hubby Joe "Face Time" Wilson—when he's not busy trashing the Bushies, anyhow. In the past, Wilson was a frequent feature on Matthews' inaptly-named "Hardball," providing lively (and false) information as he fed Matthews' (and others') feverish interest in flogging the fake-but-accurate Plame-gate scandal. Who knows? Maybe Matthews, a former Tip O'Neill flack, thought he could help the Dems by piling on and destroying another Republican presidency, a la The Trickster.

But now, the fun is over. Plame-gate has been exposed as nothing more than a crock of crappola, a scandal based on precisely the same kind of manufactured "facts" that got Mary Mapes and Dan Rather canned.

So, is Hardball's pit-bull interested in pursuing the "rest of the story" as feverishly as he fed the media frenzy that was built on lies? Matthew Shepherd of NewsBusters had a chance to ask Chris just that. Here's what he got:
Q: So I've noticed you haven't done anything on the whole Valerie Plame story since the Armitage story broke. Why not invite Joe Wilson on the show to defend himself?

A: Because he'd say basically the same thing he always says. 'My wife had no involvement in getting me the mission.' He'd just repeat it over and over.

Q: Maybe, but isn't it at least worth showing your viewers that this guy has no credibility considering how much you talked about the story before? Shouldn't he be held accountable for wasting all our time? Why not invite one of his representatives or defenders on the show?

A: Well, the story's just gotten so complicated. I mean, it's just such a mess. Because what if it's true that Armitage was the source, but those other guys [presumably Rove and Scooter Libby], also were leakers, what then?

Q: Isn't that a question worth exploring on your show?

A: It could be but the problem is that Dick Cheney has so many apologists it's ridiculous. So many journalists like Bob Woodward will say or do anything just to get access to him. And then all the people in the administration too.

Q: I don't see why this is stopping you from mentioning the story at all. The viewers at least need some sort of closure don't they?

A: Hey listen I need to get out of here. I have to get back home.

After that remark, Matthews left the conversation. He stuck around for about 15 minutes before leaving.
When it feeds BSD (Bush Derangement Syndrome), any story is HOT HOT HOT.

But when it's exposed as essentially a pack of lies, all interest dies and the MSM moves on.

Remember: Being a Democrat means never having to say you're sorry.

No comments: