For the past several nights I have been watching MSNBC to see the meltdown that Keith Olbermann has been having about the newly elected Senator from Massachusetts, Scott Brown. In that quest I happened to catch two other shows; one being Chris Matthews (anything but) Hardball and the Rachel Maddow Show. It is nice to know that the ability to look foolish is not simply an Olbermann trait.
As his guest Chris Matthews had the authors of the recently Published book "Game Change" about the 2008 presidential election. Chris was quite stunned he said to read that John Edwards reads nothing. This statement came from Elizabeth Edwards. No newspapers, no magazines, or anything one might think a man running for President may look at. Chris went on to recall how when he travelled with Edwards on his campaign bus he noticed a lack of newspapers, or periodicals of any type. Then he wanted to know why the American people were unaware of such a thing. Unaware that a man running for the highest office in the land is in fact, an empty suit. The authors agreed with his assessment and went on to talk about Edwards lack of understanding of even the most basic issues. How could this have happened?
It was at this point I thought I may start screaming at my television set, "It is you fault Matthews, it is your fault". Is the agenda for MSNBC and perhaps a good part of the media, so far left that something like this will be overlooked in order not to hurt the democratic candidate? The reason no one knew Chris is you didn't tell us! You, a member of the media noticed something you thought odd and either did not bother checking it out or did but decided to say nothing in order not to hurt one of your own. Look in the mirror Chris, the problem is staring right back at you.
As far as Rachel Maddow, she is by comparison a nice diversion to the other two shows. She is left of left no doubt, but does try to at least position her show is one of real news and not strictly the talking points handed her from the democratic party. Last evening she was discussing Scott Roeder's upcoming trial for the murder of Dr George Tiller. Tiller was killed as he made his way into church in May of 09. Tiller was the medical director at a clinic in Witchita Kansas which was one of three nation wide that performed the much debated "late term" (after 21 weeks) abortions. Dr Tiller whose clinic was fire bombed in 1986 was also shot in both arms in 1993. He had his enemies. The shooter, Shelley Shannon was sentenced to eleven years in jail. His clinic for years had been harassed by protesters. He was as determined to stay and protesters were determined in putting him out of business.
So what is my beef with Rachel Maddow? In her questioning of her guest who interviewed the confessed shooter she wanted to know how much the general anti abortion movement influenced Roedor's decision to shoot Tiller. The author answered that while it may have had some, it was hard to say and in fact Roedor was a bit out there. Perhaps not criminally insane, but close. Maddow then went on to say that in her opinion it in fact played a large role. It sounded as if she believed that all anti abortion folks had a hand in this killing. That is my beef. To lump an obviously deranged man with those who oppose abortion is ridculous. Dr. Tiller had his right to his medical practice however his right does not supersede those who wish to protest.
The vast majority of those who favor as well as oppose abortion do not condone such violence on any of those who hold views opposite or their own. You do not end violence with more violence. Maddows attempt to say those who peacefully oppose abortion had any part in the doctors death is flat out wrong. MSNBC should learn that those on the left are not always right and those on the right are not always to blame.