I really think I liked Tucker better than I like David Gregory's show.

[LostInAnomie]

At least with Tucker you knew exactly where he was coming from, and in most cases you had someone on to counter balance him. He was also honest enough to point out that many of the topics that the media covered intensively were really non-issues in the mind of the voter.

David Gregory's show on the other hand is about nothing more than trying to stir the pot and throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks. Gregory, who portrays himself as a neutral player, controls which of his guests get to discuss what issues, he allows the most superficial and trivial topics to be discussed in depth and treats them as if they are going to break a campaign and then scoffs at guests that feel that they are non-issues, the guests take part in rampant speculation based on CW about what matters to the voters. It is essentially nothing more than a forum for ridiculous talking points and smears to be loosed on national TV and then be discussed as if they were real issues.

I really wish MSNBC would have a Tucker vs Maddow show.

[ellenfl]

1. tucker . . . blech! eom