Skip to comments.Krauthammer Tells 'Liberal Pals' on PBS '...
Posted on 09/29/2012 9:52:30 AM PDT by Kaslin
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer gave quite a scolding Friday to his fellow panelists on PBS's Inside Washington.
During a discussion about the murder of our ambassador in Libya, Krauthammer said, "I just want to respond to my liberal pals over here. I cant believe you guys are covering for the administration on the Susan Rice thing when they themselves said five days later it was obviously a terror attack" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Krauthammer Scolds 'Liberal Pals' on PBS: 'I Cant Believe You're Covering for the Administration' on Libya
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I just want to respond to my liberal pals over here. I cant believe you guys are covering for the administration on the Susan Rice thing when they themselves said five days later it was obviously a terror attack. Obviously, everybody could see it. So why for a week did the administration pretend that it was a demonstration?
NINA TOTENBERG, NPR: Well, it wouldnt be a very good plan if they were pretending and then saying something different later.
KRAUTHAMMER: Its a good plan because the longer you draw it out, the less that the media and the country will care about it. Its an issue, you seize of the issue right away, and its worked. Who talks about it other than
GORDON PETERSON, HOST: Well, were talking about it.
KRAUTHAMMER: The third PBS segment of the show. Come on, give me a break.
PETERSON: Now youre insulting your audience, the people who are still with us.
KRAUTHAMMER: No, these are the nine people in America who really care about stuff. What about all the others?
Well, I guess that makes me one of the nine people in America who really care about stuff.
As for Krauthammer, he was 100 percent correct.
If President Obama were Republican, the media would be going nuts over what happened in Libya earlier this month, so much so that it would be having a significantly negative impact on his reelection chances.
But because these folks are all in on getting this man another four years, their reporting on this matter has been atrocious.
Sadly, that's been par for the course for America's corrupt press since Obama first threw his name into the presidential ring in February 2007.
For the record, besides Totenberg, the other "liberal pals" on the panel were PBS's Mark Shields and Politico's Evan Thomas.
We are supposed to care the Romney put his dog on the roof 30 years ago, and might have bullied a kid in high school, but the White House’s actions two weeks ago are old news.
Nina Totenberg needs to be put out to pasture....with her martini shaker and pool boy.
Kraut is right...nine people watch PBeeeEssssss.
PBS just got hammered. Krauthammered that is. 9 viewers. Priceless!
Love the way Totenberg & Shields scoff at the assertion they’re covering for the administration. As if nothing could be more ridiculous.
I sometimes wonder if this is not all about their ability to sell their crappy newspapers and Ragazines. If Obama wins they can sell tons of papers and other stuff by investigating everythinhg they should have before he was ever elected. Am I crazy to think this way?
I’m shocked that they had Krauthammer on. Smacks of carelessness on their part. Evidently no one at PBS ever watches FNC so they were unaware of his political stance.
Produced for commercial television first, in segments, with holes for commercials. After the show is recorded, an additional segment, the “PBS” segment is produced. The program is edited to remove the commercial holes, and add the “PBS” segment to bring it closer to the half-hour.
Technically, the program is syndicated to public television stations, by American Public Television, and is not a “PBS” program.
When K. is referring to the PBS segment, he means that only the viewers watching the program on a public station will be able to see that content.
Charles, like the other "conservative" pundits, are the last to know. They have been covering every stinking thing this POS in the WH has done since his inauguration.
Thank God for Mr. Krauthammer. He probably feels like a lone voice over at PBS. Wonder how long till he is let go?
What is even more disgusting is we pay for PBS to cover for Obama....!!!!
Ahem, Mr. Krauthammer, uh.. Wolfe's book Radical Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers? Remember?
The 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, psycho spoiled brats were celebrated in the establishment MSM as the most intelligent generation ever!. They are now arguably that very establishment that praised them and they hold themselves and their ideological issue in even higher regard.
They hijacked the now defunct Democratic Party in the 1970s.
Why waste your time? They are ideologues. The end justifies the means. They are the mau-mauing flak chuckers. They are protecting Obama, the biological/ideological issue of Marxist-Alinsky campus radicals. They worked for two generations to get this far.. they are also there.. "Bring it all down, man."
I disagree, they knew that Krauthammer would draw a larger audience don't you think?
Notice how none of them object to be called a “Liberal” pal.
I did not know he was on PBS I guess because I don't watch that liberal pile of slugs...
Tottenberg and Shields are filthy sychophants.
Charles... on point and correct as usual. Mark Shields and Nina (I hope you die of AIDS) Totenberg can’t hold a candle to him.
Wasn’t Totenberg the twit that “reported” the Anita Hill incident in order to derail Clarence Thomas’ confirmation to the SCOTUS?
These are the aged 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, psycho spoiled brats and their ideological issue.. while you are at it, Mr. Krauthammer, why don't you admonish their cohorts here..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.