Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Bernard Goldberg: Charlatan

Let me just come out and say it: I don't like this guy. Never have. His flimsy, right-wing rhetoric is simply the adult manifestation of a long-held high-school type grudge, and as such, has no merit. Plus, anyone that admits to agreeing 90% of the time with the pernicious demagoguery of a fringe dingbat like Ann Coulter is undeserving of any modicum of respect on my part. ( I wonder if Coulter's repeated calls for Arabs to be converted to Christianity across the board, is part of Goldberg's 10% ideological parting with the blonde blabbermouth. Hmm...)

But what has forever sealed his fate 'round these parts is his doctoring of a 2008 Tom Brokaw interview with Charlie Rose to further his bias of the mainstream media, and by extension their supposed love affair during the presidential campaign with then-Senator Obama. Media Matters did its homework and has caught Goldberg in the act, exercising his own trumped-up version of the bias he regularly accuses the mainstream media of committing, in his most recent book. (Nope, I'm not even gonna mention its title. Fuck him.) In editing the transcript of the Brokaw-Rose exchange--in which they each question their respective knowledge of both presidential candidates--Goldgberg omits key words in certain sentences, as to spin the general meaning, and uses parts of one response to tailor the answer to a different question to his intent: their lack of knowledge about Obama, only, when in fact they raised the same questions about Sen. McCain in the same interview, as well.

You're a class act, Goldberg.

But wait--surely he defended himself righteously when confronted on this point and called Media Matters on their lies, right?

"The overall point Tom Brokaw is making is that neither he nor others in the media knew as much about Barack Obama as they wanted to know. This is an impression that left not only me but apparently Tom Brokaw feeling uneasy."

OK, so what he is basically saying here is Yeah, well, what matters is that I think I'm right, not if I'm accurate or ethical.

Yes! Cheers to you, Goldberg. But if you ever say anything about unethical journalism again, you lying hypocrite, hope that you don't bump into me afterwards, 'cause I just might take you out back and spank ya with a 2x4. Your other lame ass book should've included your own name in its asinine list, for you, sir are most assuredly one of the people that's screwing this country.

1 comment:

  1. I must insist that herein you miss GOP Rule #1, sir.

    GOP Rule #1:
    GOP = good; not GOP = bad.

    It allows for nothing more than that.

    Yes, everything is Black & White (where Black = bad & White = good).

    It's quite simple, really. Saves the effort of thought. You really do muddy the waters rather badly here with your moral or ethical musings.

    That's so...Democrat of you, sir.

    ReplyDelete