Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1.    #1  
    It's odd to me that at this late moment, no one in this often politically heated Off Topic forum has paid homage to Tim Russert's sudden death.

    I honor this man because he is the pinnacle of non-partisan political press. No matter which side you may consider yourself, this guy would give you the hard question. I think Pat Buchanan said it best today when he said, and I paraphrase, "He would throw you the hard heat but he would never aim at your head. Always right down the middle."

    His loss to political journalism is a void I don't see being filled soon, and that saddens me. Worse of all, this election is very exciting and groundbreaking and I'm truly saddened he did not have the opportunity to see the end.

    Lastly, the most important thing I know about Tim Russert is, he's Authentic, and we need more of that these days.

    I raise this glass to Tim Russert:


    You are already missed!
  2. #2  
    I did not watch him much... well, I don't really watch tv so no surprise.

    Hopefully he had insurance and his family will be taken care of...

    My aunt recently died and she took care of those close to her in life...

    My uncle is about to go and my dad is not doing so hot... heck, I almost left here earlier this year.... it was very close. As I jokingly say, "Only the good die young so I'm not eligible." Hope not anyway... lol

    Never know in life....
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  3. #3  
    I would like to extend my sympathies as well. It was a sad day indeed.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  4. #4  
    My Sat afternoon and Sunday morning has a void. I cannot imagine who they'll replace Russert with.

    I felt like this when David Brinkley retired.

    There is a distinct difference in style from these old-timers to the younger generation of "journalists" who have cut their teeth on cable news networks.

    He was Senior VP at NBC. I expect his family to have no financial problems.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  5. #5  
    I'm a huge Russert fan - Meet the Press was required watching on Sunday mornings. There are few journalists that had his sense of fairness and gravitas.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    His loss to political journalism is a void I don't see being filled soon, and that saddens me. Worse of all, this election is very exciting and groundbreaking and I'm truly saddened he did not have the opportunity to see the end.
    I agree completely. I can't think of anyone who had his level of enthusiasm and fascination for the sport of politics. I watched him every week. He had great interviews with every important politician and candidate, and I also respected him for the balanced political discussions he hosted with political journalists and with partisan players.

    I'm glad that it was Tom Brokaw who made the official announcement, and that he'll be hosting this Sunday's MTP. I hope they can somehow convince him to take over MTP. Otherwise, I worry about who they might pick. Two of Russert's deputies are nowhere close to being capable of replacing him.
  7. #7  
    Last edited by pdxtreo; 06/14/2008 at 12:19 PM.
  8. #8  
    A straight shooter. A genuine individual right to the very end. Evident every time you watched him address the public and each time a question was posed to a candidate. Never affected by conservative or left leaning interests and agendas - This was truly a gem of a person rare in the world of politics today.


    Wish there were more out there like him, particularly among those seeking this nation's top position.
    Now more than ever.

    Thank you, Tim.
    Last edited by logmein; 06/14/2008 at 11:38 PM.
  9. #9  
    They just announced that Tom Brokaw will be hosting MTP until November.

    I like Brian Williams, but he gave it a shot this morning and was not very good, IMO.
  10. #10  
    I would have posted something, but I've been voluntarily offline (vacation) since the 13th. Russert was one of my favorite political journalists if there can be such a thing. I was never a big MTP fan (usually my TV watching on Sundays is limited to TiVoed shows I don't watch during the week), but I always enjoyed his contributions to other debates, forums, and interviews on NBC and MSNBC. Watched some of the memorial coverage while in the land of the capitalist mouse, and raised a pint in memory.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    They just announced that Tom Brokaw will be hosting MTP until November.

    I like Brian Williams, but he gave it a shot this morning and was not very good, IMO.
    I'm grateful that NBC has had the good sense to provisionally give the slot to Brokaw. Both he and Williams are practitioners of genuinely fair, impartial, and quiet journalism.

    They both listen more than they speak.

    Being that this is an election year, with November only a few months away, I'm relieved that Chris Mathews has not replaced Russert -- as I expect will happen eventually.

    Mathews poses as an objective reporter while stealthily advocating his personal views.

    Unfortunately I far too often saw this in Russert as well.

    Regretably I was never a fan of Russert the moderator, and of the journalism he practiced.

    He regularly treated my "friends" with bulldog aggressiveness, while allowing those I oppose to smoothly dodge questions with smiling acceptance. McCain, junior, and cheney got the soft touch while Hillary, Kerry, Dean and others had their flesh torn from them.

    While advocate moderators have a place on cable, I'd prefer my network broadcast journalism to adhere to the neutral Brokaw style.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    Being that this is an election year, with November only a few months away, I'm relieved that Chris Mathews has not replaced Russert -- as I expect will happen eventually.

    Mathews poses as an objective reporter while stealthily advocating his personal views.
    Matthews doesn't pose as an objective reporter. He states his views.

    Unfortunately I far too often saw this in Russert as well.

    Regretably I was never a fan of Russert the moderator, and of the journalism he practiced.

    He regularly treated my "friends" with bulldog aggressiveness, while allowing those I oppose to smoothly dodge questions with smiling acceptance. McCain, junior, and cheney got the soft touch while Hillary, Kerry, Dean and others had their flesh torn from them.
    I suspect you're extrapolating from the Democratic debate. Your claim about the soft touch is flat out wrong, IMO, and I suspect that you didn't watch his interviews with McCain, Bush, and Cheney.

    The biases I sensed in Russert were that he didn't trust the Clintons and he was opposed to the Iraq War. But most of Russert's interviews were aggressive. His interview with McCain was especially brutal.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Matthews doesn't pose as an objective reporter. He states his views.

    I suspect you're extrapolating from the Democratic debate. Your claim about the soft touch is flat out wrong, IMO, and I suspect that you didn't watch his interviews with McCain, Bush, and Cheney.

    The biases I sensed in Russert were that he didn't trust the Clintons and he was opposed to the Iraq War. But most of Russert's interviews were aggressive. His interview with McCain was especially brutal.
    I have for years DVRed and watched 2-3 Sunday talk shows. I seldom missed MTP.

    For a long time I've expressed my feeling that Russert was unequal in his aggressiveness. It would be hypocritical of me to change that view simply because of his premature and regretable death.

    I did watch his interviews with junior and Cheney and McCain. As well as his interviews with Hillary and Bill.

    My memory is that junior and cheney were not subjected to the relentless Russert treatment for which he was justifiably known. They do not submit themselves to many tough interviewers -- Russert had them both before and after the war, and let them slide.

    My most recent memory of how he treated Hillary on MTP was of how he ambushed her with quotes taken out of context -- something that angers me still.

    But my recollection is that he did similar things to Kerry, Dean, and Bill. I always felt he was toughest on my friends. I never felt he was as neutral as he presented himself as being.

    And as the Washington bureau chief of NBC News, he set the tone for the entire network's political coverage. MSNBC's unfair treatment of my preferred candidate is something in particular for which I have held him responsible.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    I have for years DVRed and watched 2-3 Sunday talk shows. I seldom missed MTP.

    For a long time I've expressed my feeling that Russert was unequal in his aggressiveness. It would be hypocritical of me to change that view simply because of his premature and regretable death.

    I did watch his interviews with junior and Cheney and McCain. As well as his interviews with Hillary and Bill.

    My memory is that junior and cheney were not subjected to the relentless Russert treatment for which he was justifiably known. They do not submit themselves to many tough interviewers -- Russert had them both before and after the war, and let them slide.

    My most recent memory of how he treated Hillary on MTP was of how he ambushed her with quotes taken out of context -- something that angers me still.

    But my recollection is that he did similar things to Kerry, Dean, and Bill. I always felt he was toughest on my friends. I never felt he was as neutral as he presented himself as being.

    And as the Washington bureau chief of NBC News, he set the tone for the entire network's political coverage. MSNBC's unfair treatment of my preferred candidate is something in particular for which I have held him responsible.
    Here's the transcript of the Hillary interview on MTP:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22634967/

    Russert just quoted people reacting to and criticizing the Clintons, and asked for a response, like he does with every guest.

    The difference between this interview and the interviews with Bush and Cheney is that Bush and Cheney don't lose their cool or accuse the interviewer of being the bad guy.

    Apparently, Congressman Clyburn mischaracterized Bill's comments, but Hillary says nothing bad about him. This reminds me of Bill's over-the-top reaction to his interview with Chris Wallace.


    And if you watch MTP regularly (at regular speed, with the sound on, and without playing your XBox), you know that Russert throws Cheney's claim that we'd be "greeted as liberators" at just about every Republican that comes on the show when they discuss the Iraq War.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Here's the transcript of the Hillary interview on MTP:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22634967/

    Russert just quoted people reacting to and criticizing the Clintons, and asked for a response, like he does with every guest.

    The difference between this interview and the interviews with Bush and Cheney is that Bush and Cheney don't lose their cool or accuse the interviewer of being the bad guy.

    Apparently, Congressman Clyburn mischaracterized Bill's comments, but Hillary says nothing bad about him. This reminds me of Bill's over-the-top reaction to his interview with Chris Wallace.


    And if you watch MTP regularly (at regular speed, with the sound on, and without playing your XBox), you know that Russert throws Cheney's claim that we'd be "greeted as liberators" at just about every Republican that comes on the show when they discuss the Iraq War.
    I didn't really want to go here again -- but by implication you're asking for a specific example that angered me. (I haven't researched the transcript, or reviewed the video, so this is entirely from memory...)

    Though far from the only time I felt him unfair, the most recent exchange I'm referring to was where Russert played for Hillary the snippet where Bill is falsely portrayed as having described Obama's candidacy as a fairy tale.

    I could hardly contain my rage at the blatantly unfair misuse of editing to knowingly distort the meaning of words. The intent was intentionally destructive -- deliberately pushing a lie to sow poison and mistrust.

    Had I been advising Hillary I would have told her to refuse to answer that or any other question until Russert cued up the full 45 second clip that completely showed Bill's words (where its clear that he was not describing Obama's candidacy as a fairy tale.)

    Had Russert pretended that he didn't have the entire tape ready at that moment, I would have had her take a tape from her bag, slam it onto the desk, and say sweetly that she'll wait patiently as its cued up.

    I then would have had her ask what his agenda was -- why was he deliberately misrepresenting her, her husband, and her campaign.

    Russert never pulled stunts like that with junior or cheney.

    He'd sometimes ask semi-tough questions -- questions that they'd bat them away with a non-response -- and then move on to the next..

    With Hillary and others, Russert could be more relentless than a shark -- coming again and again and again with follow up, after follow up, after follow up ...

    Its not asking tough questions that make for good interviewers -- its not letting up until the subject answers. Russert seldom did that with Republicans. (and yes this is said through the recall of someone who watches those shows at double speed while doing XBox Live ...)
    Last edited by BARYE; 06/24/2008 at 12:46 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    I didn't really want to go here again -- but by implication you're asking for a specific example that angered me. (I haven't researched the transcript, or reviewed the video, so this is entirely from memory...)

    Though far from the only time I felt him unfair, the most recent exchange I'm referring to was where Russert played for Hillary the snippet where Bill is falsely portrayed as having described Obama's candidacy as a fairy tale.

    I could hardly contain my rage at the blatantly unfair misuse of editing to knowingly distort the meaning of words. The intent was intentionally destructive -- deliberately pushing a lie to sow poison and mistrust.
    Thanks for providing a specific example. It's actually on the first page of the transcript.

    Russert played the same clip that everyone played. And it wasn't Russert who "falsely portrayed" it has having described the candidacy. It was Congressman Clyburn, who Russert quoted. This is really no different from when Russert quotes some Democrat accusing Bush or Cheney of having lied or manipulated the intelligence. It's B.S., but when he brings it up, the proper response is to calmly refute the claim. Again, Russert just quoted the Congressman.

    Also, you can see in the transcript that Hillary continually interrupts and argues with Russert, accusing him of being unfair. She's like the NBA players who fall down anytime there's minimal contact, trying to draw a foul call, IMO.

    If you recall Obama's MTP interview, Russert raised all the "unfair" points that have been thrown at him in the past. Obama didn't play the victim or argue with the interviewer. He responded articulately and maturely.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Thanks for providing a specific example. It's actually on the first page of the transcript.

    Russert played the same clip that everyone played. And it wasn't Russert who "falsely portrayed" it has having described the candidacy. It was Congressman Clyburn, who Russert quoted. This is really no different from when Russert quotes some Democrat accusing Bush or Cheney of having lied or manipulated the intelligence. It's B.S., but when he brings it up, the proper response is to calmly refute the claim. Again, Russert just quoted the Congressman.

    Also, you can see in the transcript that Hillary continually interrupts and argues with Russert, accusing him of being unfair. She's like the NBA players who fall down anytime there's minimal contact, trying to draw a foul call, IMO.

    If you recall Obama's MTP interview, Russert raised all the "unfair" points that have been thrown at him in the past. Obama didn't play the victim or argue with the interviewer. He responded articulately and maturely.

    Russert is responsible for what he put on air.

    The "I'm just quoting the Congressman" dodge is a transparent G-string of an excuse.

    In an hour program to not use the complete sentence so as to not distort the intended meaning ??? Something that would have meant perhaps at most another 20 seconds ???

    Utterly dishonest and entirely unforgivable.

    If the NYTimes made a practice of editing people's words so that their meaning was intentionally distorted, how much credibility would the NYTimes have ??

    Would it be enough for the Times to excuse itself by saying that the NY Post has done it ??

    MTP presented itself as a serious journalistic platform of record -- not a exploitive shoutcast demolition derby -- not some O’Reillyesque cable tabloid.

    Russert knew the edited partially quoted text represented a distortion of meaning -- and he was sophisticated enough to understand how sensitive and poisonous was the subtext he was promulgating.

    Its tough to seem ”calm and mature” when you are the target of ceaseless unfair attacks like this one.

    What’s more Russert was the lead voice in determining how the political coverage was framed, how all the candidates were to be covered by all of NBC, MSNBC, CNBC. His POV infected the journalism of several networks.

    This BTW, was not the only example of unfairness and faux impartiality by Russert toward candidates I supported.

    Sorry, but I will not be joining the chorus here and elsewhere singing for his canonization ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    Russert is responsible for what he put on air.

    The "I'm just quoting the Congressman" dodge is a transparent G-string of an excuse.

    In an hour program to not use the complete sentence so as to not distort the intended meaning ??? Something that would have meant perhaps at most another 20 seconds ???

    Utterly dishonest and entirely unforgivable.

    If the NYTimes made a practice of editing people's words so that their meaning was intentionally distorted, how much credibility would the NYTimes have ??

    Would it be enough for the Times to excuse itself by saying that the NY Post has done it ??

    MTP presented itself as a serious journalistic platform of record -- not a exploitive shoutcast demolition derby -- not some O’Reillyesque cable tabloid.

    Russert knew the edited partially quoted text represented a distortion of meaning -- and he was sophisticated enough to understand how sensitive and poisonous was the subtext he was promulgating.

    Its tough to seem ”calm and mature” when you are the target of ceaseless unfair attacks like this one.

    What’s more Russert was the lead voice in determining how the political coverage was framed, how all the candidates were to be covered by all of NBC, MSNBC, CNBC. His POV infected the journalism of several networks.

    This BTW, was not the only example of unfairness and faux impartiality by Russert toward candidates I supported.

    Sorry, but I will not be joining the chorus here and elsewhere singing for his canonization ...
    You're confusing two separate things.

    First, he played a clip of Bill talking about the fairy tale. There was nothing dishonest or misleading about it. Russert made no assertion and drew no inferences. Read the transcript. Please stop responding based on your memory. He didn't distort anything. It would have changed nothing to play a ten-minute clip. It would have changed nothing if he played no clip at all. Because there was no controversy immediately after he played the clip. The length of the clip is a red herring, and you fell for it.

    Second, he asked Hillary to respond to two African-American Democrats, both superdelegates, who were offended by Bill's remarks. One of them was Congressman Clyburn. The other was Donna Brazile. Neither had chosen sides at the time. Apparently you think Russert lacks journalistic integrity because he dared to ask Hillary about Clyburn's remark.

    Hillary believes that Clyburn mischaracterized Bill's comment. But instead of criticizing her colleague, whose superdelegate vote she was still begging for, she decided to blame Russert for Clyburn's remark - as if playing the short video clip of Bill during the interview somehow magically caused Clyburn to distort Bill's comment.

    What you call an "unfair attack" was made by a Democratic superdelegate who had yet to publicly endorse a candidate. That's news. IMO, it's reasonable, and expected, for a journalist to ask Hillary about it.


    As for the "shoutfest" - again, read the transcript. It's Hillary who continually interrupts and talks over Russert as he tries to complete his point.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    (and yes this is said through the recall of someone who watches those shows at double speed while doing XBox Live ...)
    Then perhaps you should keep your 'mouth' shut?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...

Posting Permissions