Soledad O’Brien to Rudy Giuliani: 'Let me finish'

politico ^ | 10/22/2012 | By KEVIN ROBILLARD

[tobyhill]

CNN host Soledad O’Brien and Rudy Giuliani clashed on Monday, with the the former New York City mayor accusing O’Brien of trying to blame George W. Bush for the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

While interviewing Giuliani, O’Brien played a clip of former Bush adviser Matthew Dowd comparing Benghazi to the invasion of Iraq, arguing it was possible for the intelligence to be initially wrong on Benghazi, just as intelligence indicating Iraq had weapons of mass destruction turned out to be false.

“We’re going to blame this on Bush, too?” Giuliani said. “You’ve got to stop putting words in my mouth, sir,” O’Brien retorted. “Let me finish, because every time I ask you a question, let me finish my point — every time I ask you a question, you like to push back like the question I’m asking you is unfair. It’s not. I’m a journalist, you said some things. I’m trying to get accurate responses from you. You are welcome to answer.”

“OK, here’s the answer: It sounds like we’re trying to blame Benghazi on Bush,” Giuliani responded. “It’s absurd to blame Benghazi on Bush. All [President Barack Obama] needs to do is answer a simple question: Did he know about the consulate attacks that took place before September 11, 2012? There were two of them, one of which blew a hole in the embassy wall. Also, did he know the British consulate, which was basically next door, that they moved out because of the tremendous amount of risk to that consulate?”

[Albion Wilde]

Then how did the legislature ever get a quorum?

Mega LOL!!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

There is no such thing as a journalist: everyone has his or her own worldview, values, and temperment. When you ask what you consider an objective question, the question in itself assumes a universe of context.

There is such a thing as a journalist - just not an objective one.

Hannity and Maddow at least are open and above board about their biases. The MSM pretends to have no prejudices and we all know that’s nonsense.

Trying for objectivity is a respectable, even noble, endeavor. But the only way to even attempt to be objective is to be open and above board about any reasons you are aware of why you might not be objective - and even then, you could not be certain that you had succeeded. Thus, anyone who claims to be objective - or who belongs to a mutual admiration society which will claim objectivity for them - not only is not objective, they are self-deceivers and/or propagandists.

[SC_Pete]

Journalism may be a noble goal but not one major news outlet practices it today. Journalism has been dead since FDR. Maybe it never DID exist given our history with yellow journalism. What we have now is advocacy journalism masqerading as unbiased and even-handed. In their worldview, it just so happens that Democrats are fair and compassionate while Republicans are extremists in every category.