Replies

The media's treatment of Mr. Russert’s passing is appalling. The only legitimate “news” in a death such as Mr. Russert’s is a brief statement of his passing to inform any audience of his absence. Everything else should be properly restricted to family, friends, and colleagues.

That has not happened here. Once again the public has been subjected to “the media” abusing the public's airwaves to perpetrate the fraud that they are important. And they have done so by turning a colleague's death into a circus.

This is not only wrong, it is disgusting.

I don't care how good or bad a “journalist” Tim Russert was. He was just a “journalist”. As such, his death is unimportant.

Well, Rush had this exactly right yesterday (and actually, I wrote about this on FR on Saturday---"Wall to Wall Russert Coverage" http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2031005/posts).

The drive-bys are mourning the loss of their monopoly on the news, on their power, and on their ability to control elections. Rightly or wrongly, Russert was the last of the "trusted men." There is no one out there now who comes close, and they are all perceived for what they truly are, political hacks disguised as "objective journalists."

My outrage was that not one of our fallen warriors gets a tenth the coverage that Russert has received; the acquitted Hadith Marines have not received a tenth the coverage he received---yet who in the long run has performed a more valuable service to our country?