• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NBC's Brzezinski: I'm "Working With The White House" On Oil Spill Talking Points

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,778
Reaction score
7,659
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
NBC's Brzezinski: I'm "Working With The White House" On Oil Spill Talking Points

RealClearPolitics - Video - NBC's Brzezinski: I'm "Working With The White House" On Oil Spill Talking Points
Joe Sestak Disease, a rare form of Tourette Syndrome is emerging from Democrats.

It's amazing what emerges from their yaps.

I heard Obi has had Congress earmark a couple billion in research to find medication to combat this evil.
It's to be called The New Manhattan Project.

It fits here but can someone move this to Bias in the Media...

.
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
FWIW, if you think an issue is important, having an op that leaves out all of the relevant details and instead includes bull**** generalizations and Birther conspiracy theory material is not the best way to encourage discussion. It also prevents the rest of us from starting a reasonable thread about the topic thanks to your poisoning of the well.

For those who actually want to talk about the issue:

Mika could be seen reading from her notes during exchanges with former GE CEO Jack Welch, who was critical of the PBO's handling of the spill. After repeated ribbing from Welch and Joe Scarborough over her use of White House talking points, Mika came clean . . .

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Do you want to know why I have a file that I've been working on with the White House—and I'll be very transparent about that? Because of your friend Rudy Giuliani who came here last week spewing out a whole bunch of nothing.
Mika Admits: I'm 'Working With White House' On Oil Spill Talking Points | NewsBusters.org
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,932
Reaction score
50,844
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Moderator's Warning:
Moved by request of the OP
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Joe Sestak Disease, a rare form of Tourette Syndrome is emerging from Democrats.

It's amazing what emerges from their yaps.

I heard Obi has had Congress earmark a couple billion in research to find medication to combat this evil.
It's to be called The New Manhattan Project.

It fits here but can someone move this to Bias in the Media...

.
I saw the portion of "Morning Joe" this post is referring to. The reason why Mika has White House talking points is because, apparently, in a previous broadcast of the show Rudy Guiliani was a guest and he was saying some pretty blatant lies about the Obama's policies and actions but she didn't have any information on hand to respond to him. So it's not bias in the media - it's forcing critics of the White House to defend their assertions and accusations. I don't see what the big deal is, especially since the show has Joe Scarborough to support such critics.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I saw the portion of "Morning Joe" this post is referring to. The reason why Mika has White House talking points is because, apparently, in a previous broadcast of the show Rudy Guiliani was a guest and he was saying some pretty blatant lies about the Obama's policies and actions but she didn't have any information on hand to respond to him. So it's not bias in the media - it's forcing critics of the White House to defend their assertions and accusations. I don't see what the big deal is, especially since the show has Joe Scarborough to support such critics.
Blatant lies?

Hardly.

Morning Joe
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
50,521
Reaction score
32,275
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I saw the portion of "Morning Joe" this post is referring to. The reason why Mika has White House talking points is because, apparently, in a previous broadcast of the show Rudy Guiliani was a guest and he was saying some pretty blatant lies about the Obama's policies and actions but she didn't have any information on hand to respond to him. So it's not bias in the media - it's forcing critics of the White House to defend their assertions and accusations. I don't see what the big deal is, especially since the show has Joe Scarborough to support such critics.
how dare she want to counter julieannie's BS with actual facts
she will never get a faux news gig that way
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,778
Reaction score
7,659
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
FWIW, if you think an issue is important, having an op that leaves out all of the relevant details and instead includes bull**** generalizations and Birther conspiracy theory material is not the best way to encourage discussion. It also prevents the rest of us from starting a reasonable thread about the topic thanks to your poisoning of the well.

For those who actually want to talk about the issue:



Mika Admits: I'm 'Working With White House' On Oil Spill Talking Points | NewsBusters.org
Care to explain?
Can't make heads or tails of it.

.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Blatant lies?

Hardly.

Morning Joe
Well, I didn't see that particular show, so I didn't know if Guiliani was lying or not - that is what I inferred from this morning's episode.

Regardless, I don't see what's wrong with using White House talking points when interviewing other commentators.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Well, I didn't see that particular show, so I didn't know if Guiliani was lying or not - that is what I inferred from this morning's episode.
You seem to infer only one politcal way and seem quick to make assumptions without a basis in fact. Maybe since I posted the link to that segment, you'd want to see that particular show first, before claiming "blatant lies". :shrug:

Regardless, I don't see what's wrong with using White House talking points when interviewing other commentators.
No no no... that's not what she said. She's not using White House talking points... she said:

"I have a file that I've been working on with the White House, and I'll be very transparent about that."
 
Last edited:

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,778
Reaction score
7,659
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well, I didn't see that particular show, so I didn't know if Guiliani was lying or not - that is what I inferred from this morning's episode.

Regardless, I don't see what's wrong with using White House talking points when interviewing other commentators.
Giuliani isn't known for making outrageous claims, so it seems even more fishy.
Rudy was a good attorney and Governor, turning around a state in disarray. A state folks claimed was a lost cause.
The guy isn't a Conservative by any measure, and I don't know of any outrageous claims he's made in the past.
He usually makes a pretty good case, only natural as it was his training and profession.

Now Mika... she's not a shill for Obama, but a journalist; she should have had someone from Obi's office or party answer.

.
 
Last edited:

winston53660

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
29,265
Reaction score
10,128
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Giuliani isn't known for making outrageous claims, so it seems even more fishy.
Rudy was a good attorney and Governor, turning around a state in disarray. A state folks claimed was a lost cause.

.
He was not Gov.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Now Mika... she's not a shill for Obama, but a journalist; she should have had someone from Obi's office or party answer.

.
You need something that indicates sarcasm there or readers may take that last part seriously.
 

washunut

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
11,565
Reaction score
3,319
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Well, I didn't see that particular show, so I didn't know if Guiliani was lying or not - that is what I inferred from this morning's episode.

Regardless, I don't see what's wrong with using White House talking points when interviewing other commentators.
Really??? How low are our expectations of these MSNBC talking heads that we are not surprised when they can't come up with their own biased spin. I guess it is true that many people just want to listen to others who spew their view of the world. Then we wonder why we have politicians who do silly stuff.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
You seem to infer only one politcal way and seem quick to make assumptions without a basis in fact. Maybe since I posted the link to that segment, you'd want to see that particular show first, before claiming "blatant lies". :shrug:
I didn't say that Guiliani was saying blatant lies, as I admitted that I didn't see that particular episode. I said that Mika said that Guiliani was saying blatant lies, which was why she's using talking points because she believed him to be lying.

No no no... that's not what she said. She's not using White House talking points... she said:
Okay, fine, you're correct. There's a vast left-wing conspiracy against Rudy Guiliani.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Really??? How low are our expectations of these MSNBC talking heads that we are not surprised when they can't come up with their own biased spin. I guess it is true that many people just want to listen to others who spew their view of the world. Then we wonder why we have politicians who do silly stuff.
Are you saying that MSNBC is so low quality because it doesn't come up with their own biased spin, unlike Fox News, which is high quality because it does come up with it's own biased spin?
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I didn't say that Guiliani was saying blatant lies, as I admitted that I didn't see that particular episode. I said that Mika said that Guiliani was saying blatant lies, which was why she's using talking points because she believed him to be lying.
Ok I can buy that.

Okay, fine, you're correct. There's a vast left-wing conspiracy against Rudy Guiliani.
Not at all... when a self professed journalist is working WITH the White House on talking points, there is no journalist, just a partisan shill. I'd hoped you would see the difference without having to go to the strawman.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Not at all... when a self professed journalist is working WITH the White House on talking points, there is no journalist, just a partisan shill. I'd hoped you would see the difference without having to go to the strawman.
She said she had the talking points to use to confront Obama critics. I don't think that's being a shill. I think that's one way of many to engage commentators in debate and discussion to get them to justify their opinions. It's not that big of a deal.
 

somepeoplesay

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
198
Reaction score
74
Location
Austin, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I hate that MSNBC takes talking points from the White House when a Democrat is in office, and FOX takes them when a Republican is in the White House (according to Scott McClellan anyway, but you could tell just by watching). Can't we have a cable news channel that tries to not show bias AND isn't totally dry and boring? CNN, i'm looking at you.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I hate that MSNBC takes talking points from the White House when a Democrat is in office, and FOX takes them when a Republican is in the White House (according to Scott McClellan anyway, but you could tell just by watching). Can't we have a cable news channel that tries to not show bias AND isn't totally dry and boring? CNN, i'm looking at you.
Don't forget C-Span.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I saw the portion of "Morning Joe" this post is referring to. The reason why Mika has White House talking points is because, apparently, in a previous broadcast of the show Rudy Guiliani was a guest and he was saying some pretty blatant lies about the Obama's policies and actions but she didn't have any information on hand to respond to him. So it's not bias in the media - it's forcing critics of the White House to defend their assertions and accusations. I don't see what the big deal is, especially since the show has Joe Scarborough to support such critics.
If she believes that Giuliani is lying, why doesn't she (god forbid) do some research on her own rather than relying on hand-fed talking points from the White House? Doesn't MSNBC have some people who could look things up for her?

It's one thing when a "news" program wants invites a political official on a show to offer a rebuttal to someone's criticism. It's another thing entirely to have an "anchor" (or whatever she is) uncritically repeat those arguments herself.

Well, I didn't see that particular show, so I didn't know if Guiliani was lying or not - that is what I inferred from this morning's episode.

Regardless, I don't see what's wrong with using White House talking points when interviewing other commentators.
Are you saying that MSNBC is so low quality because it doesn't come up with their own biased spin, unlike Fox News, which is high quality because it does come up with it's own biased spin?
If a Fox News guy was responding to someone else's point by literally reading off a list of bullet points that the Bush administration had distributed, Fox would be (deservedly) savaged by a large swath of the population.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If she believes that Giuliani is lying, why doesn't she (god forbid) do some research on her own rather than relying on hand-fed talking points from the White House? Doesn't MSNBC have some people who could look things up for her?

It's one thing when a "news" program wants invites a political official on a show to offer a rebuttal to someone's criticism. It's another thing entirely to have an "anchor" (or whatever she is) uncritically repeat those arguments herself.
I personally don't care. The way I see it, anchors are free to do this as well. The way I see it, a commentator comments, and then the anchor says, "Well, this is what [so-and-so, in this particular case the White House] has to say about that topic," and then the commentator rebuts or supports it.

It's just one way, out of many, to get someone, specifically of a different opinion, to talk about a topic. I don't think it should be done for every news program, but neither do I think it should be vilified. What's the purpose of "Morning Joe"? To sell commercials. How do they do that? By talking about the news, including politics. Is using White House talking points a method to get people to talk about politics? Yes. BFD.

If a Fox News guy was responding to someone else's point by literally reading off a list of bullet points that the Bush administration had distributed, Fox would be (deservedly) savaged by a large swath of the population.
And I still wouldn't care either on that particular point, as I think that Fox News has other more important points that deserve a savaging by a large swath of the population. But that's an issue for a different thread.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
She said she had the talking points to use to confront Obama critics.
:slapme: Apparently the first time I quoted her exact words, it didn't sink in. Please don't make me regret posting the exact quote again.

"I have a file that I've been working on with the White House, and I'll be very transparent about that."
I don't think that's being a shill. I think that's one way of many to engage commentators in debate and discussion to get them to justify their opinions. It's not that big of a deal.
If what you said was true, I'd agree, but what your saying she did is not true. You understand the difference between these two sentences right?


I have a file that I copied from the White House ...
I have a file that I've been working on with the White House...

Let's just imagine Rush Limbaugh in 2006 saying he's been working on talking points WITH the White House... not that big of a deal right? :lol:
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I personally don't care. The way I see it, anchors are free to do this as well. The way I see it, a commentator comments, and then the anchor says, "Well, this is what [so-and-so, in this particular case the White House] has to say about that topic," and then the commentator rebuts or supports it.
If an anchor said "Well, the Obama administration has argued X, how would you respond to that?," that's both common and acceptable. The reason why it's so common is because it's an honest way to have a discussion - if you're repeating something from an interested party, you identify that party, lay it out for the audience, and treat it no differently than you would an assertion from the other side.

When she is repeating talking points that she compiled with or received from the Obama administration, and citing those talking points as an argument rather than a jumping off point, that's much different. She's gone from being a (somewhat) neutral party to becoming an advocate for the party she's representing. It's just entirely unprofessional and pretty pathetic on her part. If a host can't summon up the brainpower to develop their own take on a subject, they shouldn't be talking about it.

It's just one way, out of many, to get someone, specifically of a different opinion, to talk about a topic. I don't think it should be done for every news program, but neither do I think it should be vilified. What's the purpose of "Morning Joe"? To sell commercials. How do they do that? By talking about the news, including politics. Is using White House talking points a method to get people to talk about politics? Yes. BFD.
Calling Obama an America-hating terrorist is another way to sell commercials, but that would be ****ty journalism as well.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Let's just imagine Rush Limbaugh in 2006 saying he's been working on talking points WITH the White House... not that big of a deal right? :lol:
No, it isn't, because it's exactly what I would expect from Rush Limbaugh, and probably what Rush Limbaugh actually did during the Bush administration even though he didn't say he did.
 
Top Bottom