On MSNBC, Andrew Breitbart: One. David Shuster: Less Than Zero

Actually, Andrew Breitbart has way more than just one under his belt, but I’m only referring to the throw-down on MSNBC just the other day. Okay, I suppose it can’t really be called a throw-down, as it isn’t a fair fight when one of the participants is, you know, intellectually-challenged. : David Shuster isn’t the brightest eco-friendly bulb on the shelf, nor is he the most honest, as he proved once again : by lying to get Breitbart to appear on MSNBC. : Screen shots of emails and twitter feed can be found at Big Journalism. An excerpt:

As you see, Shuster is attempting to lure me into this story based upon the false premise of his objective neutrality. Notice he says, “As I said, I don’t have a horse in this race.” A simple Google search of David Shuster and James O’Keefe immediately finds that Shuster went into a Twitter frenzy to tar and feather James O’Keefe and propagated what are now provably false lies about the Landrieu case.

Andrew Breitbart, one of my Thinkies Porn ™ staples, could viscerate Shuster with words with one lip tied behind his head (he’d still look totally swoony, to boot). That’s not the main issue; the issue is why on earth is David Schuster still being held up by MSNBC as an objective journalist? As Allahpundit pointed out , look who Shuster had on immediately following Breitbart – after Breitbart was off air and had no chance to respond – : Eric Boehlert, of: Media Matters:

Right after Breitbart was cut off and this segment ended, Shuster brought in Eric Boehlert of Media Matters to play a few minutes of softball about what a shady guy Breitbart is. If you follow AB’s Twitter feed, you know that he regularly taunts Media Matters – and Boehlert particularly – for propagandizing for the left. I’m sure having him on here and giving Breitbart no chance to respond to him was pure coincidence.

Shuster is allegedly one of MSNBC’s “reporters”. He’s not billed as a commentator on an opinion show. His:  twitter feed and his oft-repeated partisan actions (for instance, : here and : here) on MSNBC prove otherwise. Breitbart himself : sums it up best:

As I am signing off here, I have just been informed that MSNBC has admonished Shuster for “inappropriate” twitter comments. But what about Shuster’s obvious lie that he has no “horse in this race,” a lie he used to try to get me into the Obama-stimulus-infused, bias-laden MSNBC eco-system? Could there be a greater admission of a journalist’s political investment in a storyline than divining (”the truth is, you intended to tap her phones”) a subject guilty of a crime he has not even been accused of? Remember, Shuster has sold out Olbermann and Maddow as the ideologues in the newsroom. If Shuster is their idea of journalistic neutrality, I can continue to sleep well acting as a journalist who openly admits that he comes to the table with a unique political perspective.

Give it up, MSNBC. Everyone with half a brain (this doesn’t include Shuster, obviously) can plainly see that your entire organization is grossly partisan and is pushing an agenda. Thankfully, as polls and recent elections reflect, most don’t like that agenda and few actually watch your channel. Still, it would be nice if you would admit it, as one of the : White House approved news outlets. : Shouldn’t you follow their “transparency” example? Oh, wait.: That’s also a huge lie. I guess that whole “birds of a feather” thing really is true.

(Cross-posted at iowntheworld.com and Horowitz’s NewsReal)

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!