Loading ...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dThRRgjXOzs[/youtube]
IS SOMEBODY ON THE TAKE?
MSNBC host Joe Scarborough launched into another fact-less tirade Monday, trying to spin the Nevada caucus and South Carolina primary results to favor his candidate Mitt Romney. This marks the second day in a row that he has pushed what he calls his “narrative” that the media — himself not included of course — is purposefully ignoring Romney’s “delegate lead.”
The first problem is that Scarborough, who was busted by The Palmetto Scoop in June for saying that Fred Thompson’s wife Jeri “works the pole,” hasn’t officially revealed his bias toward (or possible connections to) the Romney campaign. Yet, in his latest diatribe, he ripped other media outlets including the Associated Press for allegedly doing just that.
Could it be that Scarborough, who has already proven his contempt for Romney’s opponents, has some kind of deeper — possibly financial — reason for using his nationally-televised “Morning Joe” show to push Romney’s agenda? I’m not sure. But what I am sure of is the second problem: the fact that his claims are completely bogus.
We debunked the “Nevada is more important than South Carolina” argument Saturday that Scarborough continues to promote, noting that: a. Nevada wasn’t contested at all… by anyone… ever and; b. Romney didn’t actually win any delegates to the national convention meaning Nevada was nothing more than a glorified straw poll.
Now Scarborough is taking his spin to new levels by flat-out distorting the truth. He said Monday (5:04 mark in the above clip), “What you’re not hearing also from the national media is this, John McCain lost among Republicans in South Carolina.”
But what you’re not hearing from Scarborough is that McCain beat Romney more than two-to-one among Republicans here.
What you’re not hearing from Scarborough is that McCain beat Romney nearly two-to-one among conservatives here.
What you’re not hearing from Scarborough is that McCain beat Romney nearly two-to-one among evangelicals here.
What you’re not hearing from Scarborough is that McCain beat Romney nearly two-to-one in the very conservative, evangelical Upstate.
And what you’re not hearing from Scarborough is that Romney outspent McCain more than four-to-one here.
Oh, and against Mike Huckabee, McCain tied among Republicans and took pretty much everything else except evangelicals.
Yet mistakenly, Scarborough thinks he can say “anyone who thinks I’m in the tank for Romney doesn’t know me at all” and that will cover his motives as he blatantly spews pro-Romney misinformation.
If Scarborough wants to lobby for Romney, that’s fine. He has every right to do it and I wouldn’t even care if he used his MSNBC show to do it. But he could at least tell viewers that he backs Romney or that he is being paid by Romney or whatever before he took to his “narrative.”
I back McCain, I’ve been up front and honest about backing McCain and I hope everyone reads my content knowing that I back McCain. I think it’s time for Scarborough to take a cue from we basement-dwelling Cheeto-eating bloggers and offer some disclosure about his “Romney’s being persecuted” storyline.
Before he started the Morning Joe thing, I really liked Joe. He seemed to be fairly moderate and able to look at things through a clear lens. However, this is not the first time since he began the new show that he has drooled out some idiotic case for Romney. It’s a wonder Scarborough was ever elected if his logic really works like this. Nevada more important to than SC??? Delegate Count? Really? Even his pal Barbara (who works for Romney) can’t make claims that absurd.
I like Joe…. but he is doing exactly what he is complaining about….. does he think Mitt or McCain can beat a Clinton or Obama machine….. the answer is No noway notta nope NO
Didn’t you already accuse Politico of being on the take too? It might be time to adjust your tin hat.
Hmm just like this site doesn’t push a narrative that John McCain and Lindsey Graham aren’t RINO sellouts and buddy buddy with Ted Kennedy. No that’d just be unprofessional now wouldn’t it?
Carlton,
Way to go for the obvious spin… you’re so creative.
Problem is: 1. I’m a blogger who is expected to give opinion to thousands of readers, not an MSNBC news anchor who is expected to give (mostly) unbiased news to millions of viewers; 2. As I noted in the piece and as you omitted in order to preserve your “narrative,” I’m up front about my preference for John McCain, Lindsey Graham, etc. If Scarborough did the same with Romney and others, it would be a different story. But he isn’t, instead he parades around as giving straightforward “analysis.”
Dane,
Scarborough and The Politico are all a part of the military industrial complex that wants to keep down the Revolution.
Adam, I have a question for you. (Considering your admiration for shamnesty and all). Does the Mexican government have any responsibilities toward its own people or should we just make Mexico the 51st state?
Wow Connie, I see what you did there. You took the word “amnesty” (implying that the comprehensive reform bill granted a pardon for immigrants who came to America illegally despite imposing penalties) and combined it with the word “sham” (implying your disdain for said comprehensive reform bill) and you got “shamnesty.”
I have to admit, that’s really good stuff. I mean, I’ve totally never heard that before. Seriously, did you think that up on your own? Or did you just hear Rush Limbaugh say it 218,964,832,689 times and just parrot it?
Because that’s INCREDIBLY original. You should so totally go write for the Colbert Report or something.
Oh, oh, oh, I know. You could take Lindsey Graham’s last name and put it in front of “amnesty” too and you would get “Grahamnesty.” Get it? Because he was one of the main sponsors of the bill. Man, that’d be soooooo funny and innovative!
Wow, you’re really inspiring! That “shamnesty” thing was just so imaginative!
And the answer to your question is that you asked a stupid question. The Mexican government is going to do whatever the hell it wants. I’m more worried about finding practical solutions on our end.
But I’m kind of thinking that I might just jump on your camp’s bandwagon and attack anyone who tries to propose real resolutions — popular or not — by spewing empty rhetoric and invectives at them. Oh man, I wish Jim DeMint would stick his neck out on an unpopular issue, because you can do so much with the last name “DeMint.”
Adam,
I think you spent so much time trying to think up new ways to attack Romney that you didn’t watch the clip.
Scarborough was pointing out the obvious–conservatives know this as main stream media bias. If they didn’t have such a love fest for your man McCain you would agree.
Joe merely points out that if Hillary is being noted on the front page for her win in Nevada, and Romney’s margin of victory in Nevada was 6 times bigger than Hillary’s, then you’d think it also deserved to be on the front page.
As for the state not being contested is because the rest of the conservatives are under the wrong impression that South Carolina will pick the nominee. Well, only one campaign has figured out that the rules have changed, and that’s why he’s going to win the nomination. There is further evidence to this bias if you want it.
Google “Romney wins Michigan” and see the count for news results. Then google McCain wins New Hampshire and seethe count for news results. It’s almost two-one in favor of McCain even though Michigan had twice as many delegates at stake, and was hotly contested, and McCain won it in 2000, and it was the largest margin of victory to this point (until Nevada of course).
[...] written two posts in the last week detailing MSNBC host Joe Scarborough’s unabashed use of his position [...]