Judging from the readers comments, fairness, it seems, is something the left will not tolerate in anyone who replaces Tim.  It must be an “activist” who knows what he’s “supposed to do”?

I heard that Tim enjoyed cultural diversity.  Getting people who lived and believed differently than himself so that he would get all points of view.

The the slaves to activist, politically correctness seek to control the nation and the population by eliminating the voice of those who do not share their activist, “liberal”, culture.

Gosh! I guess I need to preface by admitting that I never watch Meet the Press. So I obviously lack the necessary passion to intelligently comment on this or any replacement for whats-is-name. But then I cant fairly comment intelligently on anyone in mainstreammedia, particularly the TV variety, since if I want a good laugh I prefer to watch the “professional” comedians.

I’m with cyrena. I think the most notable thing about this article is the photo.

samosamo,  It’s probably good that you didn’t ask me a question; I would hate for you to have to deal with an intelligent answer.

Now the dilemma:  We know you really didn’t uncheck the box, so do you answer or not.  On the one hand you really want to ask something to try to shut me up, on the other hand, what does it look like if you respond after saying that you would not?  That’s a tough one.

Tim Russert was obviously a great dad. He wrote well. He had a really engaging personality. He chose a smart, strong and talented wife. He was good to his dad.  He was bright and glib. But for all those who think he asked the really tough questions at a time when the nation really needed him, check the analysis at fair.org. Short answer: not so much.

As to Brokaw, don’t expect any better. The generation that he named the greatest had a lot of young men and women who served honorably in World War II and gave their lives for their country. But that same generation had its share of war profiteers, Jim Crow racists, and assorted other nasties. My point? Through his rose-colored glasses, don’t expect him to see the truth about our government’s very real sins and shortcomings any better than Russert did. When your paycheck is in the same stratospheric range or higher than the folks you’re pretending to hold to account, chances are you share a lot more in common with them than with the folks in your audience who are counting on your intelligence and guts to ask the tough questions that need asking.

jeffxx

Damn, I swore I unchecked the ‘notify me’ box but apparently I didn’t. This time it is unchecked. I don’t have time for neocon operatives who are still trying to beat timmy up about his job. But since you have seen timmy at work about 2 3/4 times more than I have, then you are an expert.
It doesn’t matter what timmy was party wise, it was his sellout to the corporate media that did this country no good. I would like to ask you a question but it would require me to check the ‘notify me’ box but I have other things to do.
Now, go bond with o’reilly.

Funny thing here samosamo: I have probably listened to Russert about three times in my life; I have absolutely no attachment.  I just really enjoy watching many of you try to make excuses for the fact that he was a Democrat.

As for the name calling, are we back in grade school?  “Your sorry neocon ass”?  Will your next post include any angry invitation to meet at the flag pole during lunch?

jeff whatever….

Want to thank you for continuing to beat a dead horse. Your hero timmy was just what most saw him as, a spineless celebrity that could or would not ask questions that would have maybe gotten some rotten crook of a politician to confess that the system was broken or the maybe he made a bad move in some political action or down right admitted he was a crook. Timmy could not or would not because his handlers would not allow it. If he did, he would not have been on the next sunday’s edition of mtp.
And as for your sorry neocon sorry ass, why don’t you go have some bonding moments with o’rilllyy? mtp was NOT a good source of information and anyone that panders to dick the vp is at least a blue dog which apparently you don’t grasp the idea of a democrat siding with the republican agenda as sort of strange.

re: By nf, June 25 at 11:48 am:

I agree. Dan Abrams would be about a million times better than Tom Brokaw. And it’s not just age. Tom Brokaw was never interesting or incisive even in his prime. Although I like Abrams so much in his present format and time slot, I’d hate to lose that.

Dan Rather is collaborating with The Center For Public Integrity?  That’s priceless!

It’s funny how it is so hard for Democrats to accept that fact that “timmmmy” was also a Democrat.  It must be unnerving to have someone who actually gives equal time to both sides.

Dan Rather? He is collaborating with The Center For Public Integrity which is sometime so far and away from meet the press that there is no comparison and that should give Dan Rather the venue he needs to do real investigative reporting. This Center For Public Integrity is run and owned by Charles Lewis who was a 60 Minutes producer until he left one day because he wanted to investigate what he wanted to investigate and take as long as it took to cover the investigations to provide real causes and effects. BRAVO!!!! Dan will do good to stay where he is unless he would be able to pull off some extraordinary reporting that would get on the news in the msm, but with the sorry ass owners playing the ‘gateway to truth’ for corporate benefits there will be little change to the ‘show’ and it will be futile to try and change it.
Also, if timmmy was a democrat he certainly was a blue dog or to define that: a republican/conservative masquerading as a democrat.

Dan Rather would have been my choice.

They should have considered someone like Dan Abrams, an energetic intelligent guy who can mix it up with anyone.  Brokaw has seen his best days - leave him retired.

By Jeff29, June 24 at 10:29 am:

Jeff, you write,

“Russert a neo-con?  You people know that he was a democrat, right?”

He was certainly helpful to the neocons. As Bill Moyers has shown, Russert was a major enabler of the neocon push for war on Iraq. Russert let Cheney spew his lies on the show virtually unchallenged. Russert treated Cheney’s preposterous utterances about Saddam’s imaginary nukes with worshipful respect. Was it because Russert was a neocon, or just because he was a power worshiper who knew that if he did the proper research and asked the tough questions, he wouldn’t get to play golf with Cheney any more? Life might suddenly get less glamorous, party invitations might stop coming, access to prestigious persons might dry up, and he might lose his job to someone more accommodating to people like Cheney.

Russert a neo-con?  You people know that he was a democrat, right?  He was just better than most at giving equal praise and criticism to both sides.  Liberals aren’t used to seeing that, so the only explanation they have is that he must be a conservative.

What an absolutely narcotically boring choice!

In an election year, and at a time when we seem on the verge of launching a war against Iran, they have chosen to make MTP an absolute must-miss.

Tim Russert marginally kept my interest on Sunday with those"hard"questions.Now that Tom Brokaw is taking over I can erase"Meet The Press” from my TIVO.The only “Meet The Press"Tom Brokaw should host is a documentary on the dry cleaning business.

Brokaw is offering “blessing” to the faithful. Brokaw is one of mainstream’s High Priests. “You who are about to die for THE LIE and we who are hanging in the background, salute you!” 4100+ fine Amerikan service boys and girls are dead and what, 35,000+ are worse than dead? Well, that would be if we could believe the numbers as reported out by the Pentagon and the Pentagon’s propagandists. Propagandists like Brokaw, Russert, ABCBSNBCNNMSNBC, the Washington Pap, the New York Slimes, and fill in the blank.

But really, will Tom be any less neo-conned than Tim?  Doubt it, free pass through the election for the malfeasant in chief and his heir apparent.

I don’t even have tv access unless I go to a major broadcasting website like msnbc. But this really looks like the msm playing up to the people with personalities(kinda like the way politicans are presented as personlaities to the people on the airwaves) that probably means to make people used to being manipulated by the mainstream media to think, ‘hey here is tom brokaw doing meet the press, we will sure enough believe what he says’. And this just another slight of hand trick to make it appear that this will be hard core journalism when in reality it will just be another fluffy foo foo Q&A;routine for the sake of selling personalities, the mc and the interviewee. Which is just as it is labeled, another ‘show’, empty and lacking of substance.
The mainstream media has an extremely long way to go to gain the trust of the people to be a source of real news. And breaking up of the monopolies will have to be a major step for this to happen. Another step will have to be the ‘journalist’ asking questions that get to the real issues of this country and the world. If you don’t make them stuter, squirm and look uncomfortable you aren’t asking the right questions.

During one of the Dem presidential debates, Tim Russert asked Dennis Kucinich about UFOs.

Many people thought this was a stupid question or it was trivial. Others thought Russert was trying to make Kucinich look foolish. Yet others felt Russert was making fun of the UFO topic.

But did Russert actually have an open-minded interest in the topic of UFOs?

Recent comments by the Vatican observatory director show that the devout-Catholic Russert may have had views in sync.

Russert was the “insider’s insider.” Did he know something?

Food for thought in the article ...

“Tim Russert’s UFO question: A step in acclimation?”

Joint Recon Study Group
June 15, 2008

http://jointreconstudygroup.blogspot.com/

Am I supposed to be impressed with tommy taking the show over during election time? Only if he started asking those darned old questions that make the guest have to think, stutter and squirm.

cyrena,
I downloaded the mozilla browser and it allows me to comment to trueout, but I have also experienced a virus attack using it and thank goodness avast antivirus stopped it but I don’t like that. Will use mozilla just to see truthout only.

What’s up with the photo? And why is he holding his hands like he’s a priest saying Mass or something, and why does he have that piece of shrubbery hanging from around his neck?

I don’t get that.