WHy do TV hosts refuse to call GOP spokes people on outright lies?

[LostInAnomie]

Tucker just had a GOP strategist on who was slinging bullshit fast and furious. Not only did she make the claim that Saddam would not allow weapon inspectors in (Hans Blix anyone?) but she also made the claim that Iraq had biological and chemical weapons. These claims - of course - went unchallenged.

It would be so easy for these hosts to shoot down these liars' bullshit but they seem unwilling to do so.

[MallRat]

1. Tucker? Come on, you expect HIM to call a GOP guest on something? (eom)

[Jacobin]

2. Oh, I dunno...Maybe because they are PAID NOT TO?

Six corporations own the vast majority of the media in this country. We DO NOT HAVE an indepedent press in this country. The media talking heads are paid huge salaries to push the RW agenda, allowing here and there for a few to dissent, so they can present them as "lefties" or "idiots" or "those people"...to lend an air of legitimacy, so to speak.

I'm surprised this question is even asked here

[baldguy]

3. Tucker would only criticize a guest if they go off the GOP script.

[Richard D]

4. Employees . . .

. . . are not allowed to criticize their bosses in public.

[Marr]

5. The official excuse is, "it's my job to get them on the record".

Which is really just another way of saying, "let them lie to their hearts' content".

I heard Al Franken say that about Tim Russert this week about 5 times. Al said someone (a political hack I can't whose name I can't now recall) "explained" Russert's role to Franken, a few weeks back, and Al bought it. He thought it sounded reasonable.

I love Al Franken, but Christ- he thought Powell's UN presentation sounded reasonable, too.

Crap- I'm sorry- didn't mean to hit your subject at such an obtuse angle.

[flyarm]

6. $$$$$$$$ N/T

[triguy46]

7. Uh...because they are ones too?

they are too well paid, and all belong to the same country clubs.

[longship]

8. That's what the right wing DLC sock puppets are for.

Of course, they just lie down and take it.

[nealmhughes]

9. Read Republican Noise Machine by David Brock, who was "cured"

of NeoConitis and published this great book of an insider's view in 2004.

The sheer number of neocon thinktanks with prepared "expert" opinions on everything from water pollution to the miracle of "freedom" making oil to cheap to meter in Iraq makes reporting "easy."

Once these clowns have enough strength and name recog, they become bona fide pundits.

They simply get shouted down if they engage a liar in the act, if an opposing view even gets heard.

Speaking of lies, How about Ari Cohen at the Heritage who even before the Iraq War II, in 03 declared that the President had "definite" "Proof" that Iraq was behind terror in the US? He also thought up the "Let's invade Iraq and get the oil privitized" scam. Next, after both have been proven outright LIES, he sits in DC and tells us that Iran must be nuked to save Tel Aviv, London, and New York from the Persian Hordes... He still gets airtime on TV and appears in print. Why? He is a laughable joke of a scholar...much as is Bill Kristol. They sit in their offices and cook up justifications for war and murder and don't wish to be bothered with the tedium of a job search, constant publishing of scholarly work, or the headache of bothering with students. Screw them, they are a waste of time they spent in the seminar room. The janitors could have contributed more than they.

[SammyWinstonJack]

10. M O N E Y! nt

[warrens]

11. Tucker is a Repuke. He will never call them on this stuff unless

It's an issue where he has cover. Otherwise, he will get nailed by the GOP as a traitor and his guests will dry up.

For most hosts, calling someone on a lie means you have to have documentation right there to refute them or they make you look uninformed. When someone does their homework and has the facts right there, these thugs collapse. They go by the whack-a-mole model: spew enough bullshit and it can't all be refuted.

Seriously, if I say that fewer people are dying in Iraq than under Saddam, can you refute that factually? No one really KNOWS how many died under Saddam, so if you debate it, I can just say you don't know the facts. That's their methodology.

[AspenRose]

12. Because they don't want to wake up with a horse's head in their bed

(Or whatever the professional/career equivalent of that is)

[Sparkly]

13. Evil or Stupid? Evil or Stupid? That's always my question....

It applies to rightwing politicians, rightwing voters, and rightwing talking heads alike.

I've asked this to myself about Joe Scarborough many, many times (and lean toward "dumb as a box of rocks").

And by "stupid" or "dumb," I actually mean "uninformed" (but you have to be REALLY stupid, imho, to represent yourself as knowledgeable about things without bothering to learn basic facts much of your audience knows).

The string-pullers of ALL of them: EVIL.

[dogfacedboy]

14. ive in a world where most people are cowards. n/t

[dogfacedboy]

15. Cowardice. We live in a world where most are cowards. n/t