8:56 MSNBC - The Fix is In - Matthews and Fineman Divert Health to Race Issue

[autorank]

What total shills these two are.

Matthews asks, "Didn't the President just step on his line?" after Obama skillfully answers a question
on the Harvard professors harassment in Boston. Then Fineman chimes in that there was no real news on
health, but the comment on the Harvard professor is real news.

Obama was brilliant and persuasive tonight.

Now the media will take that away from him.

Who represents MSMBC owner General Electric - the corporate media.

No reason to be disappointed or angry with Matthews and Fineman, they're just doing their job.

[bdamomma]

1. oh yes, they are spinning away,

Lynn Sweet was all off base with that question.

[tridim]

2. Rachel isn't falling for it.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. They were wrong -

but, you watch - the rightwingnuts will go off on Obama's statement that the Boston Police were stupid (was that the word he used?), and they're going to start with the ugliest, most racist bullshit ever.

Health care?

Pffffffft.

Watch...............................................

[autorank]

16. They can start but we'll finish it

Anyone who herd this will think that Obama has it together, was being honest, and made a strong
case for health care.

I thought it was great that he said that the police behaved "stupudly" - the guy was in his own home and they
entered - disorderly conduct my ass.

He said what he knew to be true.

All around success

Look what Fineman said in Marcy 2009


LIVING POLITICS
Howard Fineman
A Turning Tide?
http://www.newsweek.com/id/188565
Obama still has the approval of the people, but the establishment is
beginning to mumble that the president may not have what it takes.

Mar 10, 2009 | Updated: 8:37 a.m. ET Mar 10, 2009


What a jack ass Fineman is. Matthews was right on que. Couple of hacks.

[babylonsister]

4. They're gone for now. Let's see how everyone else shakes out.

:hi:

[Graybeard]

7. Thank goodness Rachel took over.

She put Fineman in his place right away. Smack!

[Telly Savalas]

20. If MSNBC serves solely as GE sponsored propaganda as the OP suggests

then why was Rachel allowed to take over?

[autorank]

22. How many other shows, aside from Rachel & Kieth, will you watch?

That's a very good question.

They need a hedge, a fig leaf to hide behind. In thiis case, MSNBC, it's Rachel and Kieth, both of whom are excellent.
But think about it, of all the other cable shows and network news outfits, who else will you go to for solid analysis
and coverage - besides Jon Stewart. That's it.

GE sells too much to the public and government to be trapped in a pure "Fox" class propaganda effort so we get two
excellent commentators out of how many? Even trolls say reasonable things a fair amount of the time, thinking we'll
believe the b.s. Same with MSNBC - a couple of tokens and it's destroy Obama, attack the public, etc.

[Telly Savalas]

26. TV is a really poor medium for news analysis, so I rarely watch.

It's nice every now and then to see what prominent figures look like, what their mannerisms are, and what the proper pronunciation is for folks with funky names -- TV news is good for that. But if you're just wanting to spend 20 minutes to get caught up with the news for the day, you're going to be able to process considerably more information and analysis by reading news on the internet in that time period then watching a bunch of bullshit on TV.

If Maddow and Olberman are merely figleafs, doesn't that mean that they're impotent and their message is non-threatening? If that's the case, why do they have so many fans here?

If MSNBC is simply a mouthpiece for the Man, then isn't anybody who watches it simply propping up the system by boosting its ratings?

[autorank]

27. No to both questions.

Olberman and Madow are fig leafs for General Electric, owner of MSNBC. They can counter the fact that CNBC is a racket, and has been for a couple of decades, and that both that channel and MSNBC have consistently undermined Democrats of any strong belief by merely saying, 'Well we have Olberman and ...' That's nice and they are not fig leafs. They have powerful messages. But they're the exception in the vast trash heap of corporate mediaporn. They're popular hear and elsewhere because they do have something to say and it's important. The two are no contradictory at all.

MSNBC is that. Watching Madow and Olberman is not contributing to that. In fact, go back to the case of Phil Donahue on on MS or C/NBC. He went off like a rocket and he was some one with broad popular appeal. Fired.

Corporate media as a group is not monolithic. There are excellent stories that come up once or twice and get spiked. And McClatchy is an excellent news organization period. There are great stories out of corporate media, in spurts. And sometimes, they come out over the objections of the corporate media. The Post revelations of the Iraq torture photos is one such example. Regardless of the reason for publication, it was very important. That doesn't negate the aggregate effect of the media monopoly owned by the corporate monopolies. Wouldn't it do a great deal of good for these media outlets to really go after real stories, bad guys, crooks, people who steal and loot the Treasury. You bet but they'd rather talk about how they have to shut down major outlets because they don't make ENOUGH money on them.

It's a scam to keep us in the dark but they can't get away with North Korea quality censorship. That would be too obvious, particularly with the Internet.

[EFerrari]

5. If there is a break in the action, either side can benefit. n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. One very good reason to encourage

everyone you know to watch pressures at WhiteHouse.gov. And to only listen to MSNBC and the rest of the MSM online when they deserve to be listened to (or watched--I tend to listen rather than watch).

[autorank]

18. I rarely listen to them

They just hopped online after the press conference. It was instant. Of course I turned it off.

Pressure needs to be applied all around.

That was a great argument Obama had: two plans a) one that will double costs and b) his, which starts to
contain things.

This is a foot in the door, this plan. There will be and has to be more.

[spanone]

8. fineman thought there was no news and the President was flat...

[babylonsister]

13. He had to find some critical talking point, didn't he. He's 'the media'. nt

[autorank]

21. They're just doing what they're paid to do & it's so obvious

This press conference was excellent. It changed my perspective from skeptical to accepting the need for this plan.
It's a start, like the original Medicare plan was.

It convinced me that the right plan will be a huge improvement over the alternative, which is more of the same.

If you get a chance, watch Matthews and Fineman in action - like a couple of old pros, just slinging the shit.

[babylonsister]

23. Hi, autorank. You NAILED it earlier. I'm watching tweets now, and the fix

is in. They're degrading the entire presser practically. It's just depressing.

But I'm glad you're on board. Smart people rock! :yourock:

[autorank]

24. Good is good and outstanding is, well, really a pleasure to see

Hey, we're in good company. Krugman blogged on it and nailed it down very hard:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8543633

"So Howard Fineman was unimpressed. And Fineman knows presidential greatness when he sees it:

He’s the Texas Ranger of the world, and wants everyone to know it. He’s the guy with the silver badge, issuing warnings to the cattle rustlers."

Nice take down Paul Krugman!

:yourock" too

[babylonsister]

25. Thanks for the link! Loved it! Kind of put some of these clowns to shame.

:evilgrin:

[bdamomma]

9. oh crap Fineman is trampling over Obama now.

saying Obama was tired. Where are those polls now???

[City Lights]

10. Fineman reeks.

:puke:

Tuning out....

[bdamomma]

11. I was happy with the Press Conference.

[City Lights]

12. Me too.

I thought he did great.

I'm sick of hearing what the so-called experts think.

[ecstatic]

14. Everything Obama said tonight regarding Gates was common sense

Shame on Rachel and other MSNBC pundits for zooming in on the race question as if it's something groundbreaking that was said. :eyes:

[Raschel]

15. I think it will be a big deal because we have a Black President addressing racial profiling.

This will strike outrage in the hearts of bigots as their biggest fear is to be dominated by the Black man.

[autorank]

28. Right

What I liked was that Obama didn't waiver on this one little bit. Saying the police action was "stupid" was totally accurate. If people don't like that, let them get arrested for disturbing the peace in their own home. It was an excellent moment only to be used by the shills to switch the topic from the extended brilliant press conference.

[BlooInBloo]

17. There are few things we like more than ripping on black folks for speaking up on their mistreatment.

[autorank]

19. Obama's answer on Gates was 100% on target

But the talking heads used it as a chance to divert attention from health care.

It was truly pathetic.

People are through with this type of divisiveness, at least the majority who know it's crunch time.