IP WATCH: Gingrich Exposes Gregory; Halperin Reveals IP's Candidate, Makes Hopeful Prediction

The D.C.-ubiquitous Idiot Punditocracy (IP) is making its presence felt on NBC-MSNBC, which is its network of choice, not Fox. On Cenk's show, for example, a dude from POLITICO said Paul Ryan is "a serious person." Really? Perhaps ... if the POLITICOs consider Newt Gingrich a "serious" politician, if that's their standard, then maybe. At least Gingrich is published — albeit as writer of shitty pulp fiction — and his enduring campaign legacy is to have coined the spot-on-target description of Ryan's Medicare-killing plan: "radical right wing social engineering." The TRUTH will out, even when it comes from a most unlikely source. (Sidebar: POLITICO is like Pravda — the old Soviet Communist Party organ — of the Idiot Punditocracy. When GOP Senator Scott Brown and IP darling wanted to distance himself from the GOP plan to kill Medicare, he did it in an Op-Ed on POLITICO.)

One-Man Wrecking Crew Newt Gingrich Exposes David Gregory's Bias

But what the POLITICO dude said to Cenk The Meek is illustrative of the IP's elitist herd thinking. Paul Ryan is in. Unbelievably, these ratbastards are still perpetuating the myth they created that Paul Ryan is the serious go-to guy for negotiations between the GOP and the White House. "Why," harrumphs the Idiot Punditocrat, "President Obama said so himself."

Morons. IDIOTS. Don't you get it? The President's been playing you like a Stradivarius violin. THINK. Why do you think (I know, it's hard, but try) the President would slip this into your bogus narrative? Because he was eager to contrast his pragmatic centrism with Ryan's ideological extremism. Only inside the Beltway could an extremist such as Paul Ryan, who distributed copies of Atlas Shrugged to his staff as required reading and crafted a budget-cause based on the neurotic Russian emigré's imbecilic and thoroughly discredited economic prescriptions, be considered a serious person. (Ayn Rand was no economist, much less a top-tier philosopher — just ask Alan Greenspan who, I must reiterate, would have done the nation a favor had he stuck to the Jazz clarinet.)

Where did this "serious person" end up? Okay, Cenk, here's your cue. One, two, three: OF COOOUUURRSE ... On Meet The Press! Exactly one week after the KING of BLING, Newt the GRINCH, made his record guest appearance on MTP, Paul Ryan took his turn. By this time, Republican schemes to kill Medicare were unraveling. Despite accounts to the contrary, the fact is David Gregory gave Gingrich every opportunity to flesh out the Right's talking points, specifically to reassure worried MTP viewers the GOP isn't out to destroy Medicare; when any rational person knows that's exactly what they intend to do.

Gregory tossed out right wing propaganda worthy of George Orwell and Frank Luntz — "Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors some premium support so that they can go out and buy private insurance" — but it wasn't enough to stop Gingrich from having a mind-melt and regurgitating the TRUTH.

Gregory tried. He used all the right language: "change Medicare" (even the Wall Street Journal said Ryan's plan will "END MEDICARE AS WE KNOW IT"), "voucher program" and "premium support" (!?), as if these GOP talking points have any basis in reality. What "PREMIUM SUPPORT" is Gregory talking about? Either seniors will have the financial means to purchase private insurance, or they won't. That is, except wealthy individuals like David Gregory, when he retires. Most seniors, MILLIONS OF THEM, will not be as fortunate. Some "premium support." David Gregory, like his comrades in the Idiot Punditocracy elites, is propagandist first and journalist (loosely defined) a distant second.

Thanks, Newt, ya right wing mole.

MSNBC Political "Analyst" Mark Halperin Comes Out As A Right Wing Tool On Hardball

Not that Halperin's political leanings are that much of a mystery. This dude has always been phobic about distancing himself from the so-called "Liberal Media" because, well, it's not about reporting FACTS and the TRUTH; it's about self-promotion and writing another kiss-and-tell gossipy political bestseller. You can read all about Halperin's anti-liberal bias here and here and here and here and here.

So why does Mark Halperin land a gig as MSNBC "political analyst"? GOOD QUESTION. It'd be quite the spin if the suits said he was to be the counterpoint to Michael Steele.

Although Chris Matthews, host of Hardball, is known in these parts as Dean of the Idiot Punditocracy, I tend to give him a HUGE pass. Lately, he's tried to be a good liberal. He's even had Eric Boehlert on his show, years after being skewered on Media Matters as one of the worst purveyors of false information. That's progress, or maybe he just wants to deflect further criticism. Still, I'm genuinely baffled at how clueless Matthews appears to be in sizing up his colleagues' political leanings. In truth, given his love of the movies, he just might be a really good amateur actor on the set of his show. But, as noted before, Chris has a good heart, which is his saving grace. He reminds me of Michael Corleone in the Godfather III: "Just when I thought I was out ... They pull me back in."

Here's what objective MSNBC political analyst Mark Halperin said on Hardball yesterday, assessing the Republican presidential field:

"Chris, I spent Saturday and Sunday covering (John) Huntsman up in New Hampshire, and I will say on that issue (working for President Obama) and on his general discussion of China, I don't think there's any doubt on both the merits and the politics that those will be pluses for him in this contest.

He has the ability to talk about one of our greatest challenges, currently and for the next hundred years, unlike any presidential candidate I've heard, with the exception maybe of a Bill Clinton. And he showed potential this weekend on a range of issues, that if he lives up to it, I think he'll be the next president of the United States."

Wow. Is this an overstatement or what, even for a "political analyst" on MSNBC, ya think? Any responsible journalist would qualify such a statement greatly. Let's analyze it, because, what Halperin says, how he uses his free and open platform on MSNBC, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IMPARTING INFORMATION AND OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS TO THE VIEWERS. Let's get one thing straight, in case you haven't figured this out yet: The Idiot Punditocracy has absolute contempt for MSNBC viewers in general, and liberals and progressives in particular.

Indeed, any responsible journalist would know that to make such a bold prediction at this early date is tantamount to engaging in fictionalized wishful thinking. Not only is President Obama in a commanding position to win re-election — (a) no wartime president has ever been defeated; (b) he has all the advantages of incumbency; (c) he will most likely outspend and outorganize any Republican nominee, who will spend lots of money just getting past the primaries and gaining the nomination — but John Huntsman faces an uphill battle against the other two contenders (at least), Mitt Romney who's sitting on a healthy war chest, and Tim Pawlenty who is the not very credible apple of Lawrence O'Donnell's eye; but who can knock off Huntsman if he finishes ahead in the primaries. Finally, there's no way to predict so early in the game what conditions on the ground (the economy, unemployment, the wars, Medicare and Social Security) will be, come election day.

So what gives? Halperin wasn't speaking to us, the viewers. He was directly addressing the Huntsman campaign. There's no question but that the Idiot Punditocracy have chosen their next president, the Great White Hope of the Beltway Media — and his name is John Huntsman. Contrast them to Larry-O. Lawrence's obsessive promotion of Tim Pawlenty has a purpose, too. He knows, as well as we do, that Pawlenty has an ice cube's chance in Hell of beating President Obama. But if he becomes the GOP's default choice, the President cruises to victory. I can dig it. Larry-O is a good lib and he's firmly ensconced in the Obama camp.

The Idiot Punditocracy represented here by Halperin has made its choice of the anti-Obama candidate. John Huntsman has the "cosmetics" and the "optics" to be the next president. All he needs now is the narrative, the media build-up and hype for why Huntsman should be our next president. Halperin's absurd "analysis" of Huntsman's prospects is a start. There's nothing like a little over-the-top flattery to get the inside track on the Huntsman campaign. Maybe there's a feeling of power for the raconteur of the election of 2008 to select the next president. That's what these people do: They set the terms of the political debate, they believe they have the power to shift public opinion, and now evidently, to select the "next president of the United States."

Interestingly, it seems Halperin and the Idiot Punditocracy have rejected Jeb Bush, perhaps because that's who the Fox-Limbaugh-National Review axis is pining for. As long as it's (a) a white guy; and (b) a Republican non-Tea Party type, the right wing intelligentsia will be happy.

So the question remains: Why is Mark Halperin an MSNBC "analyst"? Have any NBC-MSNBC execs been over for dinner at the Roger Ailes compound recently? As for MSNBC viewers, maybe it's time to tune out. Have you checked your cable bills lately? We pay part of their salaries with our patronage. And I'm kind of pissed to see a self-promoting poseur playing fake "political analyst" on my dime.

This is for Mark Halperin and his new-found love John Huntsman (with apologies to Bryan Adams):