Comments on: Lynch Mob, Print Assassins Go After Smerconish – What Hypocrisy!

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:13:39 +0000

At least Larry recognizes Media (doesn’t) Matters is an extreme left-wing group. Give him credit for that.

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 23:56:35 +0000

Larry,
Tammy Bruce, the former chapter President for the National Organization for Women, who is a self avowed liberal democrat was on Bill O’Reilly last night. Bruce claimed that the hit on Imus was one of many on a list that the far left wing of the democratic party had compiled. Bruce said it began years ago with a hit piece on Dr. Laura based on something she said where they could take it out of context and then destroy her. At least to the point where sponsors would be reluctant to stay with her. Bruce said that although Imus was a moderate liberal who gave a format for many liberal politicians to espouse their views he was not in line enough with their far left wing and did not indicate that he could be easily manipulated and therefore he had to go. Bruce said that she supposed many republicans would be on this list but that they would feel a need to purge many mediocre democrats who did not adhere to their ultra-liberal way of thinking first. Particularly with the upcoming election appoaching the horizon. Bruce admitted that during her tenure as NOW president she used this network for her own organizations’ gain figuring the ends justified the means. It got me to thinking. Smerconish, love him or hate him is not one to be easily swayed from his opinion. He seems to be a man of his convictions and by Bruce’s definition would fit into the category of who Soros’ crowd would target. Savage, who I find hard to stomach, I guess would also be included on this list just because of his anti-liberal positions. Although she never mentioned Smerconish or Savage she did offer that both O’Reilly and Hannity were already on this list and said that we already saw Sen. Liebermann subjected to it during his primary battle against Lamont. I had the feeling that Tammy Bruce was giving us a fascinating revelation and I welcome you to look into this interview. It appears that Hillary may have had it half right. There is a vast winged conspiracy. It just comes from the left. Look into it Larry if you dare, I’d love to hear your report.

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 20:31:50 +0000

1. I think the site is Media Matters, not Media Watch. (Not that I want to give them any publicity.) Media Matters is funded by George Soros, the Democrat party sugar daddy.

2. You list Coulter and Savage as “conservative hate-seekers”. Will you ever list any “liberal hate-seekers”? You can’t tell me there aren’t any. Maher has said some pretty hateful things about Republicans and Christians. (Just one example.)

3. It’s curious that Media Matters went after Imus. Imus is no conservative. He’s called Bush “dumb”, Dick Cheney a “war criminal”, all tired mantras of the left. His show is often an outlet for Democrats and liberal journalists and authors. So it leads to a question of why Media Matters would go after him?

My theories:

- They want to capitalize on the Imus gaffe as a gateway to after the guys they really want, like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc. – anyone who does not tow the Democrat party line. They are still smarting from the Air America failure. So if they can’t beat them, they will try to destroy them.

- Imus dislikes Hillary Clinton. He has not spoken well of her, insulted her and her husband when he appeared at the White House Correspondent’s dinner, and would have supported one of her opponents in the next election. So this was a “hit” to take him out (although agreed that he handed them the gun) as a pre-emptive strike.

I’m not big on conspiracy theories, but you have to wonder.

In my opinion, Media Matters is no different than Joseph McCarthy.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:34:22 +0000

Larry, most of the analysts haven’t mentioned Imus’ long history of these type comments. You and Dick Morris are among the few who have. Any idea why, since his history is a matter of record?

I concur about Michael Smerconish. He’s fair and not predictable in his views. I’ve never heard or read anything he wrote that spews bile like the more extreme types do. To put him in the same category with Coulter, Savage, Maher or Carville is ludicrous.