Saturday, May 12, 2012

Tim Carney's Disrespect of Tamron Hall: What They Say About Lying With Dogs ...

MSNBC'S TAMRON HALL, one of the recognized sweethearts in the business, was rudely and inaccurately challenged by wingnut libertarian Tim Carney, resulting in his mic being shut off, with Tamron saying, "done." This caused a furor in right wing media. Carney was identified as a Washington Examiner commentator by, among others, our favorite right wing rag, The Daily Caller, which is bankrolled by Foster Friess. You know, the right wing billionaire who said in his day women placed an aspirin between their knees for birth control and advised President Obama to wear a helmet while campaigning in the South. According to the DC, "The Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney probably won’t be getting a call from any of MSNBC’s “NewsNation” bookers about an appearance any time soon."

That may be. But here's the thing: They failed to mention Carney is a fixture on MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan Show as a member of its so-called "power panel" along with Tamron's next guest, Jimmy Williams, another Ratigan pal, who is a lobbyist and self-described "Democrat" — although his function on Dylan's circus of libertarian disinformation is to spend lots of time bashing the Democratic Party, with no "balanced" quid pro quo from Carney toward Republicans.

Which begs the question: Isn't there a qualitative difference between an "in-house" guest and someone from outside MSNBC? The answer is YES. Carney's disrespect of Tamron was compounded by the fact he is a daily regular on another MSNBC show and, therefore, cannot be considered a hostile, or adversarial, guest. It's his "house" too, as a regular, and as such there are rules of personal decorum to be observed when you're on the same "team" regardless of ideology. Carney's rudeness, disrespecting the host Tamron, accusing her of using "a typical media trick" that supposedly "hypes" a story was completely out of bounds. He was there as an "in-house" guest to comment on a story in the news. Not to criticize the host for bringing it up, which is her job.

Furthermore, Carney's whiny outburst is factually baseless. Mitt Romney's behavior as a gay-bashing bully in his teens raises legitimate character questions, especially considering his evasive response to it, first claiming he didn't remember, then laughing off the cruel incident which traumatized other witnesses and participants and could easily rise to the level of assault today. It's not a trivial thing, and at the very least Romney missed an opportunity to use this experience to condemn bullying in all its forms and to empathize with gay teens, who are among its main victims. He didn't do it. It should also be noted that when Romney cried foul against a reporter in Colorado who asked about his position on legalization of marijuana, Romney was disingenuously protesting too much. It was a perfectly legitimate question for Colorado, which is one of the few states that has legalized medical use of marijuana, and might see a reversal of its policy under a Romney administration.

Memo To Tamron And MSNBC: The more you bring wingnuts into the MSNBC fold the more problems like these you'll encounter. The fact is, Tamron, there are limits to how much we can all "get along" and as you've discovered with that other small-time radio wingnut you MADE, who returned the favor by subsequently dissing you, this "friend" thing with wingnuts is a one-way street. Or as the saying goes: When you lie with dogs you wake up with fleas. (Try telling that to Sweet Melissa.)

P.S. Agreed, Melissa. Leaning "Forward" is not necessarily leaning "left." But what's your problem with "leaning left," and what does it mean Melissa? Please to explain, madam academic. At some point too much accommodation becomes collaboration. As in Vichy France.

No comments: