Actually, Jerry Springer has been both a legitimate journalist and an elected official.

He’s a Democrat, of course. It’s what we’d expect.

He had his own agenda. But he’s worse than those who would spit on returning soldiers or would riot. The accounts of the anger felt by helicopter pilots in Vietnam toward the protestors and such things as “when you go home on leave, do not wear your uniform as it may give offense to many, such as the protestors” aroused bitter resentment, along with the realization that there were many in the USA (who to this day dishonestly and stupidly glorify themselves) who were deliberately undermining the effort in Vietnam and wanted to see us leave, or to see us fail, and at times because seditionist and even treasonous. (The loser-copycat Vietnam stuff, complete with the self-glorifying attitude by the people responsible, about Iraq as “another Vietnam” offends those of us who know and are better, especially because of what it truly represents. Jane Fonda had company then and now.)

If I’ve lost Cronkite,” the President of the United States said, “I’ve lost America”

It would have been grounds for laughter at the proposition and derision of it as well as the man and the media were Bush to have said that about Dan Rather (especially; also Peter Jennings, the 1994-election-result elitist “temper tantrum” slanderer, Tom Brokaw, et cetera), not to mention his laughable and notoriously liberal and news-vapid replacement, Katie Couric.

The media and journalists were held in esteem then; the biased media with frequent “crusader” journalists (when not engaging instead in info-tainment, even re-enacted news events) enjoy no esteem now. They are considered frequent adversaries of Americans, not only of politicians.

Oh, and we Americans don’t admire the talking heads and DC-politically-based-celebrity and parasite crowd any more than we do “journalists.”

Most bloggers are no better (they are tech-hyping self-absorbed kids who are amateur columnists, for the most part) but at least opinion(!) and discussion groups like this (as with reader remarks on on-line news postings) are more free-form, open, truly liberal (“liberative,” as I was saying earlier today about something related to contemporary Cuban music, is probably a better word), and interesting.

East-Coast-style talking-head shows often are as mind-numbingly boring as those stupid soap operas — pro sports are more intelligent as well as much more interesting and exciting than any soap opera, for crying out loud! — and the host shows are just DC celeb-parasite-junk now (e.g., Chris Matthews, so stupid his first name is displayed larger than his last name, and in all lower case, true nose-picker dumbed-down English for boors who wrongly believe they’re hip or too lazy and stupid to capitalize when and whereit’s required in English), or (where politicians appear) they are cynically exploited as bonus press conferences, party propaganda opportunities, politician limelight-seeking, and even quasi-campaign commercials. And some of them feature constant interruptions and shouting above one another that reminds me of dogs fighting over a food bowl.

Since when should the MSM drive foreign policy? And you couldn’t pick a better example of why they shouldn’t.

Cronkite got it wrong. Tet was a major military failure for the North, and almost destroyed the North’s army. Had the political fallout in the US, driven in no small part by Cronkite’s announcement combined with images that the MSM could not put in context, changed the CW attitudes towards our efforts, we likely could have prevailed (with a ‘surge’!)

But, speculative revisionist history is just that, and we will never know for sure.

Of course, another indirect result of the Cronkite Proclamation was the election of Richard Nixon. Ironic, huh?

Finally, as we are talking about the press, another speculation. If Fox refused for political reasons to run a neutral ad by a left-leaning organization, do you think there would be some indignant posts and comments here, rather than the deafening sound of silence towards NBC we are witnessing for hte same thing towards a right-leaning group?

However, it’s Dan Rather (more than any other top network “journalist”) who was the most notorious example of the liberal media while in his top network position, and who discredited himself in addition to his network and the media at the end in a way I don’t believe anyone would conceive Cronkite would do. I believe Cronkite on the air would show some bias but wouldn’t be godawful about it when (mainly) questioning, and even criticizing Bush. Plenty of us non-liberals have grounds for doing so. (The first time I said that, a liberal responded, no doubt with a gasp: “The awakening!”)

The departure of voices like Cronkite has left an information void that spin and disinformation have rushed in to fill.
What kind of clarity can you expect from a people of whom high numbers still believe that Saddam Hussen attacked the Twin Towers?

Well, at its beginning, this day looked as if it might be one of armed conflict between Soviet vessels and American warships on the sea lanes leading to Cuba.

It was the only thing he said that I remember, but he definitely had a knack for reporting, and it would have been great if I could watch him work on CBS News nowadays.

Instead, I now get to watch Bill O’Reilly dismiss Cronkite as “far left”. Bill, this man never looked at his job as a ratings race, or as a haven to boast, lie, and confront guests. That’s why you’ll never go down as being as great a TV news legend as he was.