Tim Russert and the End of No-Talking-Points Journalism

posted by John Nichols on 06/14/2008 @ 10:10am

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Newsvine
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (57)

Subscribe Now

The passing of Tim Russert leaves us in the midst of an essential election season without the man who had been the steadiest and most serious inquisitor of the powerful during the darkening period when broadcast journalism was degenerating beyond parody.

There will be praise for the host of NBC's "Meet the Press" whose interviews of presidential candidates were often revealing, who still steered discussions toward the neglected concerns of working Americans, who gave rare forums to the dissenting voices of Russ Feingold (five times, most recently as he emerged as the clearest anti-war voice in the Senate) and Ralph Nader (regularly, even after other media outlets stopped asking the consumer advocate to appear), and whose love of politics -- and respect for frequently disregarded constituencies -- was infectious.

There will, as well, be criticism of Russert's 2003 interview of Vice President Dick Cheney on the Sunday before the war in Iraq began; and the fact that when the moment demanded an Edward R. Murrow interrogation we got instead a Larry King-like nod-along with power. Every journalist makes mistakes and this was Russert's most serious. Unfortunately, it came at a time when most media outlets -- broadcast and print -- were making the same mistake of trusting an administration that was owed nothing but skepticism.

Russert would enjoy the praise but accept the criticism.

His was a big, bold persona of the old school -- disinclined toward the preening and pompousness that had come to define his chosen profession. Most importantly, though he had come from the political sphere himself, Russert rejected the "talking-points" approach to electoral analysis that is now practiced on most networks programs.

As someone who has known Russert for more than a quarter century -- since he was an aide to former New York Governor Mario Cuomo and I was a student at Columbia, introduced to the political player from Buffalo by consummate New Yopk journalist Marty Gottlieb -- I can agree with what both John McCain and Barack Obama have said on his passing.

Russert was, as McCain says, "the preeminent political journalist of his generation." And Obama's right that -- even if he faced few competitors in the vast wasteland of what passes for television news and public affairs programming -- "There wasn't a better interviewer in television nor a more thoughtful analyst of our politics, and he was also one of the finest men I knew."

But the best assessment of Russert's premature death came from a pol who shared the "Meet the Press" host's working-class roots and distaste for what has become of broadcast journalism.

Wisconsin Congressman Dave Obey -- the gruff chairman of the House Appropriations Committee -- said it best.

"Tim Russert's death is not just a body blow for NBC News," said Obey, "it is a body blow for the nation and for anyone who cherishes newsmen and women who have remained devoted to reporting hard news in an era increasingly consumed by trivia."

Comments (57)

All the best to Russert's family and friends the world over -

Posted by winyahn at 06/13/2008 @ 8:56pm
For a boy growing up in South Carolina, watching Meet the Press was not only edifying in that it brought diverse viewpoints to bear on the big political questions of the day; it was an example of how to engage through respectful disagreement so as to bring truth to light. Thank you Tim.

Posted by martincaver at 06/13/2008 @ 9:26pm
Baruch dayan emet. Rest well Tim. The only thing that bites is he doesn't get to see how it all turns out.

Posted by yutsano at 06/13/2008 @ 9:27pm
True, yuts....this was going to be a VERY interesting election and I couldn't wait to see Tim and his "dry erase board" explaining the ins and outs on November 4th.

He was a good 'ern.

The fact that Repubs and Dems alike respected the guy shows how upright and honest he was. Early on conservatives pointed to his associations with Cuomo and Daniel Patrick Moynihan as him being "liberal media".

Later, after seeing how fair he was, he actually got attacked by the LEFT as much as the Right.

NBC has some big shoes to fill at MTP.

Posted by Mask at 06/13/2008 @ 9:34pm
My sincerest regards to Big Russ and the rest of the family. This is the worst Father's Day weekend since my own father passed away in February 2006. I have recorded and watched Meet The Press for so many years. Who will wish the Bills well each Sunday? Who will brilliantly examine both sides of each issue equally? God bless all the Russerts.

Posted by CLM1580 at 06/13/2008 @ 10:13pm
http://mediamatters.org/items/200604050007

Edward R Murrow he wasn't. not even Bill Moyers.

Posted by emile duBois at 06/13/2008 @ 10:16pm
Russert was a likable sort and a genuinly good person but I felt he sometimes let politicians of the hook when he had the chance to hold them accountable. Maybe the politicos threatened him with boycotting his show. Who knows. But overall he did a pretty good job. The best thing that anyone could say about him is that he worked hard as hell and always tried to get it right. I think that's what he will be remembered for.

Posted by frankgrits at 06/13/2008 @ 11:22pm
Russert was one of the very very few who seemed unbiased. The cliche "Only the good die young" comes to mind.

I bet Olbermann lives to 120.....

Posted by bleedingheart at 06/14/2008 @ 12:36am
May Godspeed you Tim. You are a good guy.

Posted by smk3 at 06/14/2008 @ 01:28am
Mr Russert.

As they say in the good land of green

"May you be in heaven half and hour before the devil knows you're gone."

I'm betting that was the case.

My prayers and condolences to his family.

Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/14/2008 @ 02:09am
When I heard the news (was still at work) I could not believe it.

Everyone of the hundreds of times that I watched him on TV, he would always display that characteristic smile, gush how he enjoyed playing politics. Playing words to look for contradictory statements, playing a lamb until he said something like: "In this NY Times of June 1995 you said just the opposite..." He would go the extra ten miles to discover a truth or be clear enough to jump into a conclusion. His motto was 'clearness', as daylight, so that the public would draw their conclusions.

Yes journalism looses an inquisitive and honest man. The void he leaves in American politics I guess will not be filled for several years. The institution which was 'Meet the Press' in taking "final exams" to politicians will not ever be the same without him. God bless him and give courage to his family in this moment.

Posted by Frank42 at 06/14/2008 @ 03:31am
Shame for anyone to die that young. And a sad loss for his family.

But let's not pretend that he was any good as a journalist. He pandered like all of the mainstream media in the lead-up to this monstrous war and, thus, bore no small measure of responsibility for hundreds of thousands of deaths that have resulted.

It goes without saying that he never uttered one public word of sympathy for the awful suffering of Iraqis at American hands.

FAIR carried a telling report on Russert, who claimed that one of the reasons he never challenged Bush, Cheney, and company was that he didn't have "access" -- this from the Washington Bureau chief. So he was not above a lie to protect his own political skin.

Posted by hsansom at 06/14/2008 @ 04:17am
Posted by emile duBois at 06/13/2008

This and his comments about ACOOK having two of her patients die on her the other day.....everybody remind me...

when EMILE JOHANNES passes on, to just say snarky things about him THAT day.

(Believe me there'll be plenty.)

Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 @ 07:18am
That Dave Obey cited Russert as a champion of hard news over trivia just shows how far we've sunk. Here was a man who, during debates, pestered the challengers over the most trivial of matters. Sure he was persistent, but persistent about Rev Wright rather than health care plans? I came to like Russert's easy-going on-air persona over the years and his way of summing up simple truths. But I could never stomach his largely inconsequential questions.

Posted by barnesgene at 06/14/2008 @ 07:26am
I know we are not supposed to speak ill of the recently deceased, and Russert was, by most accounts, a nice guy, it saddens me that he is being held up as the paragon of journalism. I think this speaks volumes about how far down that profession has sunk in the last decade. Mr. Russert did not do his job in 2002, 2003, arguably the most important time in his career. He, like almost all other "journalists" on the tube at the time gave short shrift to anybody that was not towing the White house Line. There is no doubt that the reason 70% of Americans thought there was a link between Iraq and 9-11 is because ChimpCo put it out there and people like Russert defended the microscopic line between what they "meant" and what they said. Without the support of mainstream news shows, this war never would have been started.

He did show people their old quotes and ask for answers, but he really never pressed too hard, or asked in-depth follow up questions. "feet to the fire" is no longer allowed in our press, gosh!, we wouldn't want to "lose access" now would we? He was better than most, but that is a low bar these days.

Regardless, I am having a frustrating, very expensive, hair pulling weekend, but, it pales in comparison to the weekend the Russert family is having. 58 is far, far too young to pass away. My meditations go out to his family.

RIP, Mr. Russert. It looks like you are going to get a heroes send off.

Posted by crabwalk at 06/14/2008 @ 09:35am
He, like almost all other "journalists" on the tube at the time gave short shrift to anybody that was not towing the White house Line.

it's a sports metaphor: toeing the line

Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 10:01am
Russert was able to play the part of moderator well wherein his guests knew that they were going to potentially get a grilling, but that it would ultimately be fair. When we have a government that decides when and how it will disclose information and answer questions, I think all of us would benefit from more in depth interview of our governors rather than the staged soundbites made before supportive audiences taken to the absurb by President Bush. Russert had the power to force these players to face the nation or lose credibility. Very few in the media can claim that power. I sometimes felt that Russert was too accomodative of government powers and excuses, but he would inevitably redeem himself by taking it up a notch when his guests were not giving straight answers. I remember once when Condi Rice was his show, and she looked pretty comfortable that she was going to have a cakewalk with Russert. She started lying and contradicting herself bigtime with regard to the war in Iraq, and Russert, visably disturbed by her lies, nailed her big time. She never returned to Russert's show thereafter.

Rest in Peace Russ. You have more than done your part.

Posted by OneVote at 06/14/2008 @ 10:37am
I did not know Tim well, but I will miss him. That says something in itself.

He had much better qualities than not. At least he tried to do better by all accounts.

That he got duped by the hsuB/cHeney admin is as much a sin as making the victim of a drunk driver do penance for getting in the way. If that's the worst people can throw at Tim, then they merely reveal their own shame for not being at the WH by the 10's of millions-- 'tar and feathering' the hsuB/cHeney admin.

It's always easier to blame someone else for ones own missing responsibilities.

And by saying what I said it should not be taken as a reprieve from our MSM to do better, much much much better. At least Tim tried hard. Perhaps too hard...

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 11:42am
it's a sports metaphor: toeing the line

Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008

Recommended penance?

Posted by crabwalk at 06/14/2008 @ 11:47am
three hail marys and one our father.

when I was a teen I had a wonderful Benedictine monk as father confessor. when I started to recite my sins, he would stop me, murmur something about god's love and proscribe the penance above. he never registered any disapproval.

Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 11:59am
and neither do I.

Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 12:01pm
Perhaps if everyone said 'three hail marys and one our father'-- we could all then progress on to the WH with hot tar and feathers?

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 12:04pm
Why could it not have been Rush, Hannity, O'really?, Coulter, Ingrahm.....

Who would come to give them Kudos..?? lol

Posted by Vvf1969 at 06/14/2008 @ 12:33pm
hot tar and feathers?

Posted by hsuBfools

this is not exactly the american way. let's make the repugs unelectable for a long time.

Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 12:39pm
Oops-- I forgot we're in 'The Age of the Weakkneed'...

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 12:49pm
The man was 58. There's a lesson there for everyone, I think.

Very few of us have any idea whatsoever when our 'time' will come.

Everything we say...and do...touches others in ways we may never know or understand. It just seems to me we should ALWAYS try to make that touch count towards something 'good', because...

...there are no do-overs.

Russert had a chance to say things to more people than most get to. Personally, I think I'll take a few private minutes to seek and find the times he said things that counted towards the 'good'. I know there are many.

Posted by Lillian at 06/14/2008 @ 1:03pm
Why could it not have been Rush, Hannity, O'really?, Coulter, Ingrahm.....

Posted by Vvf1969 at 06/14/2008

----

Or Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld...Or Hitchens, Kristol, Krauthammer...

A lot of people feel as you do.

Posted by KSP556 at 06/14/2008 @ 1:15pm
But let's not pretend that he was any good as a journalist. He pandered like all of the mainstream media in the lead-up to this monstrous war and, thus, bore no small measure of responsibility for hundreds of thousands of deaths that have resulted.

It goes without saying that he never uttered one public word of sympathy for the awful suffering of Iraqis at American hands.

FAIR carried a telling report on Russert, who claimed that one of the reasons he never challenged Bush, Cheney, and company was that he didn't have "access" -- this from the Washington Bureau chief. So he was not above a lie to protect his own political skin.

Posted by hsansom at 06/14/2008

----

This is true. He didn't use his clout to call attention to certain unpleasant subjects, such as the Israeli Occupation, or the problem of poverty at home, or the injustice of the healthcare system, or the obscene & immoral waste that is Pentagon spending.

On the other hand, he did have Ralph Nader on his program numerous times. I saw him really grill Rumsfeld last year, and this year he did a very fair job with the primary coverage.

I think a lot of people will miss him because he seemed like a warm and genuine person. That same thing cannot be said for maybe 90% of TV talking heads.

Posted by KSP556 at 06/14/2008 @ 1:23pm
Why could it not have been Rush, Hannity, O'really?, Coulter, Ingrahm.....

Who would come to give them Kudos..?? lol

Posted by Vvf1969 at 06/14/2008 | ignore this person | warn this person

Well, I imagine there would be a monster's ball of remorse somewhere.

Hannity's tribute to Russert last night on Fox was telling. Something like...." I refused to go on his show because I knew he was going to bring up things that I previously said."

Thats two in a row for Hannity this week. He as much as admitted he is a surrogate for the right wing this week when discussing the issue of using surrogates to push the nasty side of election politics. Kudos Hannity....dig your own grave. Of course, these admissions will likely cause a ratings increase for Hannity among his devoted followers.

Posted by OneVote at 06/14/2008 @ 1:28pm
Why could it not have been Rush, Hannity, O'really?, Coulter, Ingrahm.....

Or Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld...Or Hitchens, Kristol, Krauthammer...

Posted by KSP556 at 06/14/2008

Reptile vampires require sharp wooden stakes in their soulless hearts to bring them down and people without weak knees to wield the stakes...

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 1:31pm
Why could it not have been Rush, Hannity, O'really?, Coulter, Ingrahm.....

Or Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld...Or Hitchens, Kristol, Krauthammer...

Posted by KSP556 at 06/14/2008

Reptile vampires require sharp wooden stakes in their soulless hearts to bring them down and people without weak knees to wield the stakes...

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008

-----

You certainly have a point. One might also say that the people who have the knees (and the balls) to wield the stakes happen to be in league with the aforementioned.

Posted by KSP556 at 06/14/2008 @ 1:48pm
Yeah but hey McClellan just grew a pear and stood up. There's still time for more people with good knees to start using them.

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 2:17pm
hah, er, pair... (well at least I didn't say peach)

Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 2:21pm
Requiescat in pace.

Russert was a solid Jesuit-trained lad. Never a rebel, he was trained to respect, not doubt, Authority, as well as to maintain a sense of justice, not an easy balance these days.

We do still have Moyers. It's unlikely to happen, but Moyers would be a superb moderator -- the best we have -- of a post-Labor Day TV debate between the 2 nominees.

Posted by sloper at 06/14/2008 @ 4:54pm
but Moyers would be a superb moderator -- the best we have -- of a post-Labor Day TV debate between the 2 nominees.

Posted by sloper

dreaming in colour.....

more likely ryan seacrest.

Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 5:28pm
would someone eulogize the four marines killed yesterday? they did not have the comfortable life that Russert and his ilk have. they did not have the outsize ego that Russert displayed. and they were far younger. they should not have been over there, fighting over who rules Afghanistan.

Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 6:24pm
Best tag: "Beloved War Pimp"

(il ragno, the Phora; posted Russert's extended effort to discredit the AEIA nuke inspectors credibility, in order to sell the public the idea that Iraq had WMD's, the chief emotional factor in the build up to war.

Also, his interview with Ron Paul.)

Russert's Day => Flag Day => Father's Day =>? Iran Bomb Day come Monday?

Posted by jones at 06/14/2008 @ 6:32pm
Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008

Again, somebody remind me to not have one ounce of sympathy, but point out what egotistical, arrogant bastard EMILE JOHANNES is....when he croaks.

Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 @ 9:23pm
I am sorry for Tim's family. He was a 'big man' not so much in stature but in confidence and presence. I'd say he was politically middle of the road and not so biased as many believe.

However, I don't wish to see his friends, the Carvilles remaining on his show. James can be entertaining but cunningly self absorbed and his wife's a duplicitous monster.

Wish Tim could trade places with those two.

Let the grieving of the Russert's be unmolested and respected.

Posted by datadave at 06/14/2008 @ 10:28pm
Best wishes to Tim's family and friends everywhere.

Posted by jumper596 at 06/14/2008 @ 11:09pm
tim russert

his eyebrows put a special edge on the newspinmachinerinsewash......

Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 11:56pm
The reason for hating Russert, Brokaw, O'Reilly (Kristols, Podhoretzim. Kagans, Seilbergers, et al) is what they have done to Fatherhood, as a public commodity.

By going through epic reconcilliation etc. with their own old men, on the public stage, after the Vietnam war era when Big Daddy Maleness was bottled and sold by Reagan and Nixon as license to kill kids (Tom Haydon ought to remember -- except Ramparts couldn't rise above its essentially anti-American Jewism, I guess).

By silting in afterward with their honky wonky "We'ere The Goody Goody Little Daddy's Boys! Making Up Sweetie Pie Dough for Commie killers" bullshit -- appropriate for their own family, out of sight, as respect modestly is. But we who stood up for America mostly had fathers, too, and superior ones to theirs, in my case, at least. As shown by their not being able to see through the manipulation of their sacred trust and respect by psychokillers to kill gooks for a political narrative. (I actually had to explain this to mine; but he listened, later said I was right.)

For instance, Russert is tagged "Jesuit", and his smiling, professional, religious-name image is associated with Reagan, McCain, Abrams and El Slvador Death Squads. Even though Jesuits sponsored leftist Liberation Theology in Central/So. America and he should have opposed Republican slaughter on religious grounds.

My hunch is this breed worship their old men because they whapped 'em. Since mine did not, except on occassions when it was actually deserved, I am not fucked up like they are. And anyone else who tolerates them.

(note: Wolff Blitzer is from Buffalo, too.)

Posted by jones at 06/15/2008 @ 05:09am
Re Russert: "Even though Jesuits sponsored leftist Liberation Theology in Central/So. America and he should have opposed Republican slaughter on religious grounds." jones

So should most of the Jesuits have opposed the slaughters on moral grounds. But they didn't. The Dan Berrigans & Dick McSorleys, & even the great Superior General Vincent O'Keefe (removed by John Paul 2) were in the Jesuit minority, alas. Russert was a product of the conventional buck (& butt) -chasing Jesuit majority like the late social-climbing Tim Healy.

Posted by sloper at 06/15/2008 @ 5:17pm
Tim Russert was a lawyer who ran "Meet The Press" as a journal of record. Unlike so many of his contempories who acted like pompous, ponderous blowhards who simply tell you their point of view while interviewing so called expert pundits, Russert interviewed those who were key players in today's events. He would question them about their decisions and it was up to the viewer, much like a jury, to decide what to believe. It was important that Russert would never tell you what to believe.

Was he Bill Moyers? No. But Moyers has an entirely different show format, where he describes today's events through his point of view in segments, and interviews those who share his same opinion. There is nothing wrong with that.

One thing that amazes me is when people say he should have done a better job grilling the Bush administration before Iraq War. It was not as if he had access to classified information that would have proven the administration were a bunch of liars. A few years after the start of the war, he did question Cheney where he asked him why he sold the war as a way to stop the spread of WMDs if the CIA told him there were no WMDs. He was only to do so then once this fact became public.

The question is where were all the Democrats in the lead up to the war?

Posted by Zeddmen at 06/15/2008 @ 10:07pm
"He did show people their old quotes and ask for answers, but he really never pressed too hard, or asked in-depth follow up questions. "feet to the fire" is no longer allowed in our press, gosh!, we wouldn't want to "lose access" now would we? He was better than most, but that is a low bar these days."

posted by crabwalk.

I agree wholeheartedly. Mr. Russert had access to a lot of influential people, which made his show important. I can't say that I watched often, but what I saw from his interviews was typically this: He would ask a difficult question of a person in power, they would deflect the question and move on to what they wanted to talk about, and he would ask an unrelated question.

He never seemed to probe deeply into flimsy covers.

I say this, again, with the caveat that I didn't regularly watch his show.

Nevertheless, I am sorry for 'Big Russ' and for Russert himself, who deserved to see the next election through.

Posted by nattiebumpo at 06/16/2008 @ 02:18am
sloper,

thnx for sharing this. Where did they go? (I actually ran into an ex-Jesuit in a Gurdjieff school in the late 70's; remarkable fellow.)

Swallowed up by Opus Dei, I guess. shudder.

I have resolved never to forget Oscar Romero.

Posted by jones at 06/16/2008 @ 02:34am
"..Was he Bill Moyers? No. But Moyers has an entirely different show format, where he describes today's events through his point of view in segments, and interviews those who share his same opinion. There is nothing wrong with that. .."

You have just described Rush Limbaugh better than anyone.

And it is the same reason Moyers, nor a Rush, will never be a good choice for Meet the Press where am ATTEMPT at an unbiased pretence is required.

And who would mourn the passing of a Rush and company? Besides the 20 millon plus listeners, I would have to say the entire AM radio industry which was saved by Limbaugh from extinction, a talk radio industry re created by him, and many of the small radio staions in small towns that now generate revenues and stay in business and provides jobs...unlike the AirAmericas of the radio...but they do have the rest of the media.

Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008 @ 09:23am
Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008

MAASCH, one point....Limbaugh gets "20 million listners"....a week.

There's some "overlap".

Posted by Mask at 06/16/2008 @ 12:03pm
Tim Russert, the dean of inside-the-beltway television news shows, died on June 13, 2008, at the age of 58 from a massive heart attack. Notwithstanding the reverential coverage on television and in newspapers, his career was symptomatic of everything that is wrong with American journalism.

Like George Stephanopoulos, who moderates a competing Sunday morning news show on the ABC network, Russert began as a political operative. Shortly after graduating from law school in 1976, Russert worked on Daniel Patrick Moynihan's senatorial campaign in New York State. After Moynihan's election, Russert was promoted to chief of staff. Moynihan had been Richard Nixon's top domestic adviser, calling for confrontation with the USSR and Third-World countries. He was also notorious for sending a memo to Nixon stating that "the issue of race could benefit from a period of ‘benign neglect'. The subject has been too much talked about….We may need a period in which Negro progress continues and racial rhetoric fades." Given Moynihan's dubious credentials, it appeared a natural fit for somebody like Russert who would carve out a television career based on deference to the rich and the powerful.

Russert's next political job was serving as counselor to New York State Governor Mario Cuomo from 1983-84, a smooth-talking liberal not so nearly as toxic as Moynihan. In late 1984, Russert left politics behind and became a vice president of NBC news. Seven years later he became moderator of "Meet the Press," a show that began on the radio in 1945 and switched to television two years later, where it is the longest-running in history.

For the entire time up until 1991, when Russert became host, the show was very similar to the PBS NewsHour -- a snooze-inducing series of interviews with top government officials. Russert, trained as an attorney, livened things up by employing a prosecutorial style with government officials, at least when public opinion favored such an approach. His goal was to reveal inconsistencies in their current stand on issues versus what they might have said some years earlier so as to yield the impression that they were "flip-floppers." Russert's interview with Senator John Kerry during the 2004 campaign was typical.

full: http://www.swans.com/library/art14/lproy46.html

Posted by lnp3 at 06/16/2008 @ 1:01pm
There's some "overlap".

Posted by Mask at 06/16/2008

Plenty of over lap in the MSM from the left.

Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008 @ 2:00pm
"Notwithstanding the reverential coverage on television and in newspapers, his career was symptomatic of everything that is wrong with American journalism."

and here's why...

"Russert, trained as an attorney, livened things up by employing a prosecutorial style with government officials, at least when public opinion favored such an approach."

Russert was precisely the kind of status seeking, rich and powerful a**kissing "journalist" that helped get us into this unnecessary war. He and his ilk have a lot of blood on their hands. John Nichols may want to gloss over his professional conduct in the build up to war, but I believe it was defining. ANYBODY can do what is right when it's easy. When the stakes are that hight, a quality human being still does the right thing even when it may cost him/her personally. I don't wish death or harm on anyone, but I certainly can't participate in the glorification of this "journalist."

Posted by paranoid36 at 06/16/2008 @ 3:42pm
Russert had his shortcomings, but he rarely stopped asking an important question until it was 1) answered in a manner that he felt respected the intelligence of his audience, or 2) made it clear to the audience that his guest was a malevolent dissembler. And he was right on when it came to Florida in 2000. Except his dry erase board should have read "Florida, Florida, Florida. Why can't you idiots get it right the first time?" He'd be steamed to know he's missing all the carnage in November.

So Great. Now all we're left with on Sunday morning is that pantywaist George Stephanopoulos and the talentless yet oddly confident whackjob Chris Matthews. I can't even find "The McLaughlin Group" on the tube anymore, which at least was hugely entertaining whenever Eleanor Clift and Buchanon got into those hilarious screaming matches. And I agree, if there were any fairness to life, it should have been Kristol, Matalin, George Will, and any number of other charlatans taken out before their time. Oh wait, I forgot, George Swill died years ago, they just keep propping him up at the round-table to keep things interesting.

Tim, you may have given war criminals like Bush and Cheney a pass in 2002, but for your prosecutorial style, your obvious respect for your audience, and your sheer enthusiasm for your work and your life, you will be sorely missed. Namaste.

Posted by HydroGirl at 06/16/2008 @ 4:16pm
Jones, in all fairness, Russert's interview with Ron Paul was somewhat enlightening in the way that it exposed how ill-prepared Paul was for running for ANY political office other than city councilman. As Russert so adeptly demonstrated, Ron Paul didn't have a clue as to how much money would be lost from federal coffers under Paul's proposed elimination of the federal income tax. His response when pressed by Russert? Something along the lines of "a lot of money". He also didn't have any idea how many troops were in Iraq. I'm just a scientist, but even I knew the answer to that one. Ron Paul's candidacy imploded because he's not fit to be president.

Posted by HydroGirl at 06/16/2008 @ 4:36pm
Its was hard not to like Tim Russert and I was very upset to hear of his loss. I do, however, feel his toughness as a journalist was way over exaggerated. I can not tell you how many times I yelled at the screen on Sunday, asking for the follow up questions. Most times they would never come. Like Larry King, he would only prod so far then let up, lest the guest not come on the show again. A good example is the run up to the war in 2002-2003. Where was the Bull dog tenacity when Bush pulled the inspectors out, then claimed Sadamm kicked them out? This goes to the heart of the continually repeated claim that Russert was always so prepared. where was the grillng of Dick Cheney over the years with all his Shenanigans? I don't recall Russert ever claiming the war was based on false pretenses, even in recent times when almost everyone now takes that view. If I had to bet on his voting preferences, I would bet he was a Republican.

Posted by mrsanfran at 06/16/2008 @ 8:49pm
Liked Russert, sorry to hear of his passing.

Odd to see the Cheney interview softened up and placed in a polite parenthetical. Fitting for an obituary, perhaps, but not the Nation's usual "hold their feet to the fire" style, where no (Democrat) is ever forgiven for compromising or backing down or making a mistake.

Mr. Russert did speak to Bill Moyers in \his special report on the media's failure in the run-up to the war. Don't recall anyone from the NY Times participating in it, so hats off to Russert for that much. If I recall, Russert's half-excuse for the media failure was that the opposition party wasn't leading the way. He kind of backed down under Moyers' follow-up, but I think that was typical: it's not news until some pol throws a soundbite at them for them to catch and hype and play "gotcha" with. Still, he was better than so many, and we will feel the loss this season.

Posted by RLawrence at 06/17/2008 @ 12:38pm
As a journalist, I think that Russert was okay. I had friends who were truly bummed out when he died, as I was. But I had one major complaint with him.....the lack of diversity on the show. If you watched "Meet the Press", you'd go around thinking that people of color and women (and by this I mean white women) don't cover politics unless Rev. Wright, Don Imus and his "Nappy Headed 'Hos" comment, or sexism and the Clinton campaign was the subject. My hope is that whomever gets the position next understands that the political coverage landscape isn't just made up of old, white men anymore and acts accordingly.

Posted by edwriter at 06/17/2008 @ 2:04pm
Was he Bill Moyers? No. But Moyers has an entirely different show format, where he describes today's events through his point of view in segments, and interviews those who share his same opinion. There is nothing wrong with that.

Posted by Zeddmen at 06/15/2008

This may be more true of Bill Moyers Journal, but did you ever watch NOW when Moyers hosted it on PBS? He conducted fascinating and very respectful interviews with such right-wingers as Richard Vigurie, Grover Norquist and, if my memory serves, Phyllis Schaffly, among others. He is actually quite willing and able to engage with his intellectual and political "opponents."

As for Russert, a person's death is a time for honest assessment, with as much respect as that person deserves. Neither sugarcoating nor inappropriate vindictiveness are called for. Russert was a decent person but only a mediocre journalist, a fairly typical representative of the mainstream media. Now, when O'Rielly or Hannity dies, or when the Iron Lady herself, Margaret Thatcher, joins Ronald Reagan in Hell, that will be the time for some serious celebrating, with no pretense of respect for the dead, even if I feel a smidgen of sympathy for their families.

Posted by cka2nd at 06/18/2008 @ 11:09am