Peacock Correct to Call Smerconish 'Conservative'?

Today Show/NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

by Mark Finkelstein

July 3, 2006

What do you call an Arlen Specter supporter who proposes a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq and accuses Republicans of 'chicanery' for introducing proposals on gay marriage and flag burning? Why, a 'conservative' of course - if you're NBC's Today show and your guest is Michael Smerconish.

This is the MSM's way of convincing viewers that there is balance in their choice of guests. As I noted here, the mislabelling reached its pinnacle a while back when Today labelled Bush antagonist Pat Buchanan - someone who left the GOP seven years ago to run against W - a 'Republican strategist.'

Today was back at the name game this morning. As you'll note from the screen grab, it labelled Michael Smerconish a 'conservative.' Smerconish is a Philadelphia-based talk radio show host. If there is a litmus test for identifying Keystone State conservatives, it was one's choice of a horse in the recent GOP senatorial primary pitting true-blue conservative Pat Toomey from liberal Republican Arlen Specter. Not merely did Smerconish [who actually served as a manager in a previous Specter campaign] support Specter over Toomey, he went so as to broadcast his show live from Specter's Senate offices! Before you point out that Pres. Bush also supported Specter, well, I'd chalk that up - without defending it- to realpolitik.

Smerconish has also expressed the belief that "it is time for the Administration to set a timetable to leave Iraq."

On this morning's Today, Smerconish was interviewed by Lester Holt, and reiterated his support for a timetable:

Smerconish: "Let them [the Iraqis] know we are leaving. Light a fire under their fannies so they stand on their own two feet. Right now the Iraqis are overly dependent on us."

Holt seemed to have more doubts about the strategy than Smerconish: "Does a military decision of withdrawal, it will be perceived as political cover for the administration?"

Smerconish: "Not if it's handled in the correct way and tied to guidelines and say if we can establish x by y date we will have troop reduction."

Smerconish also described as Republican "chest-thumping" and "chicanery" their introduction of flag burning and marriage amendments.

Smerconish is surely a Republican. And he no doubt harbors conservative views on some issues, notably including border security. But to portray this middle-of-the-road Republican as a 'conservative' exemplifies the MSM's truth-in-packaging problem.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Today Show/NewsBusters truth-in-packaging ping.

[litehaus]

Ah, cum'on...msnbc has the 'moderate' Chrissy Boy.....LOL...

[Freedom_Fighter_2001]

Contrast Smerconish with Mark Levin. Levin also worked for Spector, but he saw first hand that Spector was a limp wristed Liberal and left his campaign.

Smerconish wants everybody to love him, but especially the Country Club Repubs. He is a screwball.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Perfect example. I recently heard Levin describe how as a young man he quit a Specter campaign in disgust.

[butternut_squash_bisque]

Needs a bit of *dulling spray* on that shiny, empty head. I listened to his radio show once, for about 90 secs. What a whackjob.

[pepsi_junkie]

So the bottom line is if you supported Arlen Specter, you cannot be called a conservative? Smerconish did indeed support Arlen, and I disagreed with it. It was very "he's my pal from way back and he lets me in his office" name dropping kind of thing that hurt his credibility in my mind. However, there is no way Smerconish is liberal. There are only two issues I can identify him as taking a liberal slant on, and those are the election of Specter and the withdrawl from Iraq (by the way, he supported the war). We should at least be fair before we cannibalize people from the right.

[Freedom_Fighter_2001]

Yes, Mike Smerconish supported Ronald Reagan and worked for his campaign. And he has been on the forefront exposing the murdering coward Mumie Ja Boobie JaBalls.

BUT There is a difference between supporting Spector versus Hill's best friend, Joe Hoeffel, and a big sloppy kiss-on-the-lips which is what Smerc has for Spector every time he talks to him. One is distasteful, the other disgusting.

By the way, timetable = cut and run. Supporting a timetable is inexcusable. Sorry, Mike, youse lost me on this one.

[new cruelty]

smerconish is a sissified liberal in all other aspects save for profiling at airports.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

There is no way Smerconish is liberal.

That's a bit of a straw man. I didn't call him a liberal. I called him a 'middle-of-the-road Republican' who 'no doubt harbors conservative views on some issues.'

[dirtboy]

Smerconish is a pure suck-up to power. And he fawns over Lynn Abraham, even though he knows all about her malicious prosecution of Don Adams.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Smerconish is a pure suck-up to power. And he fawns over Lynn Abraham, even though he knows all about her malicious prosecution of Don Adams.

I hadn't heard about that. Outrageous!

[dirtboy]

This Don Adams:

Prosecuted by Lynn Abraham (who Smerconish sucks up to as "one tough cookie") - for assaulting the fists of Teamsters with his face.

[new cruelty]

for assaulting the fists of Teamsters with his face.

LOL.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Agent 99 is relieved to learn that. But seriously, I do recall that incident and am shocked that Smerconish would support the prosecution of the victim. Can that really be? How did he justify his position?

[dirtboy]

I do recall that incident and am shocked that Smerconish would support the prosecution of the victim.

He does not support it - he just pretends it didn't exist (but he actually knows the case quite well) as he extolls Abraham's wonderful ethics every time she comes on his show. I usually have to change the dial lest I ralph in rush-hour traffic.

I think Abraham's malicious prosecution was worse than the Duke rape case. She should be in jail, not in power. And shame on Smerconish for acting like she has any ethics whatsoever.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Thanks for the additional information.

[Mo1]

Personally I can't listen to Michael in the morning ... he tends to drive me nuts with some of his comments

Though you can listen for yourself .. he's on in the morning 5:30 to 9

http://www.thebigtalker1210.com/

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Thanks, Mo1. He seems to have gone almost overnight from a local host to a national figure. As you know, in addition to his Today appearances, Chris Matthews frequently has him on as a guest on Hardball.

[Mo1]

He seems to have gone almost overnight from a local host to a national figure

He's been doing the cable channels for a while now

He's also written a couple of books

Michael isn't a liberal .. though I don't think I would call him a Reagan Republican either

Michael tends to start his show off asking a liberal leaning question .. then after callers take him to task .. he'll come around to the conservative thinking

I'm not sure if he does it on purpose or not .. but that's the part that drives me nuts .. I don't like yelling at the radio that early in the morning :0)