Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 14, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

MIRROR, MIRROR....Since loathsome media stars are in the news this week, I'm curious: who do you think is the most loathsome of all? Feel free to interpret this any way you want: personally most annoying, most damaging to the body politic, most dishonest, most harmful to the general karma of the universe, etc. Whatever. Basically, who would you most like to get rid of?

By rights, I suppose the answer should be someone like Michael Savage, Bill O'Reilly, or Sean Hannity. And those are all good choices! But for reasons I can't fully articulate — perhaps because I just don't watch enough TV — my choices are Nancy Grace and Chris Matthews. If "Wall Street Journal editorial page" were a person, they'd make my list too.

What's your choice? And even though I'm not setting a good example here, let us know why you chose who you chose. But please keep the language entertaining, not offensive. It's a weekend, and the cats might be reading.

Kevin Drum 2:06 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (186)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Rush Limbaugh, obviously, because he's a disgusting jackal.

Posted by: ahab on April 14, 2007 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

Chris Matthews' evil twin, because he must have one, or misses the lithium.

thelrd in TEXAS

Posted by: larry davis on April 14, 2007 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

Brian Williams. He consistently contorts the news to be as favorable to the administration as possible. Most of the wackos really sound and act like wackos and thus become entertainers more than authorities to most viewers. Williams, though, is more subtle. Subtle manipulation is worse than obvious.

Posted by: ml on April 14, 2007 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

Nancy Grace is my choice. Sure, there are liberals with whom I disagree, but Grace is a whole different level of meanness and dishonesty. Her coverage of the Duke lacrosse rape accusation was just the last in series of dreadful performances

There was a Saturday Night Live parody a few months ago and a recent John Stewart segment. Both were devestating. In fact, they were barely parodies. Her actual performance is beyond parody.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 14, 2007 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

Glenn Beck, because he's on freaking CNN and he'll say horrible things but with a smirk and a "oh, golly, gee whiz" attitude, so everyone passes it off and moves on.

Posted by: Cassidy on April 14, 2007 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINK

I'd have to say that Moyer is one of the most knee jerk political hacks out there. The rest have at least some redeeming qualities.

Posted by: Amerlcan Hock on April 14, 2007 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

Many to choose from, as you say, but Fred Hiatt deserves to be on the list for sure. And Charles Krauthammer, although I suspect nobody reads him.

But if I have to pick one, Rush Limbaugh is it.

Posted by: Fred from Pescadero on April 14, 2007 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

I don't think you can do any better than Nancy Grace -- I suspect that her vicious accused-equals-guilty orientation has shifted a lot of viewers' attitudes in a truly frightening direction. But O'Reilly, Hannity, and Savage are fine, fine choices.

Posted by: MatthewB on April 14, 2007 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

I think Rush Limbaugh deserves credit for the propogation of contempt as a political movement. And therefore ought to be first to walk the plank.

Some South African guests were trying to understand what has happened in America, HOW it could have happened, and I had to explain Rush to them, just to even get started making some sense of it all. Of course they had never heard of him.

Before there was Newt Gingrich, there was Rush Limbaugh.

...

Posted by: JTH on April 14, 2007 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

Rush Limbaugh.

Plus he deserves extra credit for being somewhat of a pioneer. The rest of them are really Rush copycats.

Posted by: jharp on April 14, 2007 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

In his own quiet way, I think Wolf Blitzer is worthy of consideration. His consistent smarminess is worthy of Joe Lieberman, and he's also, fairly clearly IMO, a not very bright guy pretending to be a person who really knows some stuff. Also, if I haven't said or implied it already, he's a lickspittle at heart.

Posted by: Larry K on April 14, 2007 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

For the Kansas City readers: Jack Cashill. He makes Limbaugh look sane and reasoned by comparison.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

"Does Dan Rather count? He is the one who used forged documents to smear the service record of a veteran. That's pretty loathsome."

_____________

What veteran? Do you mean the guy who let daddy protect him and keep him out of the draft pool for Vietnam? Do you mean the guy who went AWOL on his National Guard duty, even though he was a prowar hawk? Do you mean the guy who now sends our young to be slaughtered for absolutely no justifiable reason?

Dan Rather did nothing wrong. He got the story right. The facts are that Bush DID go AWOL. Just because one document among many turned out to be faulty doesn't alter the facts.

Beyond that, the veteran you want to defend instigated one of the most disgusting smear operations in our history against Kerry. The Swift Boat liars. Got anything to say about that, Al?

__________

My choice of most loathesome:

Ann Coulter, Michele Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Savage, Melanie Morgan, Glenn Beck . . . plus Michael Ledeen and the entire neocon/chickenhawk cabal.

Theocrats like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell aren't far behind in their loathesomeness.

Posted by: Cuchulain on April 14, 2007 at 2:41 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, Kevin.

Have you consider looking leftward? Kos is the one who drove a Democratic senator out of the Democratic party, partly because that senator happened to be Jewish and therefore supported Israeli interests too much. That's pretty toxic.

Posted by: egbert on April 14, 2007 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

Dobson. Hands down for me. The others, Rush, Grace, et al, are all about politics. Vile as they are, they are eventually crushed under the weight of their own shallow mendacity.

But James Dobson (mis)uses religion to operate a political organization. Religion is powerful, and more dangerous than any political party when hijacked by such scoundrels.

Posted by: ww on April 14, 2007 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINK

You mean someone called that draft-dodging drug-addled mother fucker a veteran????

Oh no, mother fucker - George aWol mother-fucking Bush is not a veteran, and whoever said that needs to apologize to all veterans everywhere right the fuck now.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINK

Senile Barbara Walters and her ugly stepchild, Katie Couric. The whole crew of phoney smarmy "How did you feel when Fluffy was run over by a steamroller?" interviewers. Who believes that they give a damn beyond the on-camera time. A voice oozing poisonous syrup.

Posted by: Neal on April 14, 2007 at 2:44 PM | PERMALINK

Brian Williams, for reasons discussed above. Kouric if she had more viewers, but she's not subtle.

Of the full loonies, too hard to choose. Probably Rush.

Posted by: Gore/Edwards 08 on April 14, 2007 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

By the way, for the cats, Fluffy was not run over. Really. No cats were harmed.

Posted by: Neal on April 14, 2007 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

Egbert. Wow. I didn't know that Kos had that much power. I thought it was the people in the Democratic primary who voted against Lieberman.

Posted by: johnr on April 14, 2007 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

"time" mag could count -- they give loathsome right-wingers (coulter on the cover, and their always dishonest columnists) the wide audience.

Posted by: Gore/Edwards 08 on April 14, 2007 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

George Will for two reasons:

1) Being on the wrong side of history for every since 1960.

2) Getting off on watching men spit and hitch up their balls...

Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 14, 2007 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with Kevin a lot of the time, but I think the blogosphere in general is too hard on Chris Matthews. He has done a lot of stuff that pisses me off, but I think he also works hard to get it right a lot too, and I think he means well. I don't have any evidence for that last part, but I just get a decent vibe from him. That said, I think Sean Hannity is the worst of the worst.

Posted by: Jesse on April 14, 2007 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

Johnr-- You may want to learn more about Kos. He's alse the one who said "screw 'em" when four Americans got killed and strung up from a bridge by terrorists. A pretty loathsome fellow, really.

Posted by: egbert on April 14, 2007 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINK

I got to hand it to Egbert. He can pack a whole lot of stupidity in a very short posting. Very concise.

My choice would have to be Limbaugh, mainly because he's been around so long.

Posted by: fostert on April 14, 2007 at 2:53 PM | PERMALINK

egbert: it was Connecticut Democrats, together with Lieberman's unwillingness to accept their rejection, that drove Lieberman out of the party. The vast majority had never heard of Kos.

Posted by: Joe Buck on April 14, 2007 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

Seriously - Cashill makes Art Bell seem lucid.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

ex-liberal seems to think that Nancy Grace is a liberal. Sorry, but people who believe that everyone who is accused of a crime is automatically guilty are not liberals.

Posted by: Joe Buck on April 14, 2007 at 2:58 PM | PERMALINK

The whole concept of a media star class is the beginning of the end.

Posted by: workingclassannie on April 14, 2007 at 2:59 PM | PERMALINK

dick cheney, on a counta how hes always on the radio or tee vee n aint nobidy lies better or more reglar.

Posted by: buddy don on April 14, 2007 at 3:00 PM | PERMALINK

It just hit me! egbert is the illegitimate whelp of Coulter and Cashill!

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, are you angling for the post of Lord High Executioner?

We have started a little list
And they truly will be missed
Thankfully

Alas, the pen and wishes are not as mightly as a snicker-snee.

Posted by: natural cynic on April 14, 2007 at 3:06 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, gosh, I can't think of anyone who I actually have positive thoughts of. Being a major media figure is nearly as corrupting as being a U.S. Senator. Hell, at least Presidents leave in eight years, at the most. Congressman are consistently vile, more so since software and computing power have aided gerrymandering, but they do still undergo examination every two years. Senators and major media figures, however, combine insularity and arrogance, which nearly always leads to profound ignorance and dishonesty. The Senators, of course, can effect legislation, which makes them more powerful, and thus worse. Other than that, however, your typical major media figure, is about as noxious as Ted Stevens or Robert Byrd.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINK

Katie Couric. There are other media figures with much eviler souls, but at least they are qualified for their jobs, good at what they do. Watching her, I get a GW Bush vibe: corrupt AND incompetent.

Posted by: lampwick on April 14, 2007 at 3:09 PM | PERMALINK

Joe Buck: ex-liberal seems to think that Nancy Grace is a liberal.

Sorry if I was unclear. I have no idea whether Nancy Grace is liberal or conservative. Her disgustingness transcends politics.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 14, 2007 at 3:10 PM | PERMALINK

Why choose? Send them all to perdition. I want 'news readers' the way the BBC does it.

How about a entire network (Faux News)?

If I had Bill Gates or Warren Buffet's money, I'd make a cash offer for one broadcast and one cable news network, and I'd offer real news and real balance of opinions - with hacks and wingnuts excluded. A better PBS!

And I'd pay for real investigative reporting, and send the stenographer-reporters back on the streets.

Corrupt government can't stand the light of day, and we need lots of daylight, and lots of stories put under the magnifying glass.

Bring back the Muckrakers, I say, and lets have a cross between the original progressive era and the French revolution.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR on April 14, 2007 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

I nominate David Brooks. Everyone knows that the usual suspects are wolves in wolves clothing.

Brooks comes closet to pulling off the wolf in sheep's clothing. Even when it seems he's trying to be reasonable, I know he's wielding a hacking knife somewhere.

Posted by: tpo on April 14, 2007 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

Oh Matthews is irritating all right, but more worthy of extinction that Savage, O'Liely or Lameball? I don't think so.

I was immediately torn between Lameball, because he reaches so many people on radio, and O'Liely because TV is such a powerful medium.

But I'm going to toss another name out there:

Tim Russert.

Cuz he revealed that everything everyone says to him is automatically off the record. And he as the gall to call himself a journalist?

Glen Beck is the next to go after Imus, I posit. CNN won't allow his drivel for too long.

Thank Gawd Rita Crosby isn't around any more.

Posted by: Cal Gal on April 14, 2007 at 3:13 PM | PERMALINK

They all are pretty rotten, but I'd say Matt Lauer and Sean Hannity are the most stupid, and give proof to the notion that one not be very smart to make a lot of money. Those two are so dumb that they managed to make Katy Couric and Alan Colmes look like they have three digit I.Q.s.

Posted by: Will Alen on April 14, 2007 at 3:17 PM | PERMALINK

"Does Dan Rather count? He is the one who used forged documents to smear the service record of a veteran. That's pretty loathsome."

You seem to be under the impression that Dan Rather is still on television as a news anchor. He is not. Please try to live in the present rather than the past (no pun intended).

My vote is for Nancy Grace, since she managed to ruin a case by goading the prime suspect into killing herself.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on April 14, 2007 at 3:18 PM | PERMALINK

Who do y'all think is the most admirable and indispensable media star? I don't even know if I can name one.

I want to say Jon Stewart, but, but... tell me there's someone else.

Posted by: lampwick on April 14, 2007 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

Nancy Grace is a nut. Now, to have some empathy, I do belive her fiancee was murdered some years ago, which gives some explanation for her nuttiness, but also suggests she isn't the best person to have a large microphone with which to speculate on various citzens' guilt or innocence.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 3:23 PM | PERMALINK

The Journal Editorial Report used to be on a local pbs station, but not any longer.
It was the funkiest group of old fascist Struldbrugs you've ever seen, each dumber and more doctrinaire than the last.
One time they were hot to deny public housing to anyone if any family member was convicted of a drug felony. Someone, don't know who, emailed in to ask about Jeb Bush whose daughter was nabbed for substance abuse. The twisted logical knots that ensued....hilarious.
Among the current crop, Chris Matthews, the loathsome thigh-rubber, is one of the most obnoxious. Brian Williams, pampered pretty boy, William Donahue....Sean Hannity, yeah, Nancy Grace is too foul to watch.

Posted by: Mike on April 14, 2007 at 3:23 PM | PERMALINK

Compare and contrast WaPo's recent editorial on Nacy Palosi's trip to Syria with today's piece on the White House email scandal. It's hard not to come to the conclusion that Fred Hiatt of the Post deserves the honor being bestowed here.

Posted by: gregor on April 14, 2007 at 3:25 PM | PERMALINK

Mark Levin. Hands down, no question, the most loathsome troll alive.

Posted by: s9 on April 14, 2007 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are the most obnoxious "media stars", though fortunately they only have a small cult following, and hence are not really stars.

Colbert is especially vile in the way he never says what he means, and instead attempts to parody thoughtful conservative views.

Posted by: Al on April 14, 2007 at 3:32 PM | PERMALINK

Coulter

followed by

limbaugh
Hannity
Mathews
russert
Grace
O'Rielly

There are really too many of them to ame

Posted by: H.C. Carey on April 14, 2007 at 3:38 PM | PERMALINK

For me it's Cokie Roberts, no contest.

She is the apotheosis of the whining establishmentarian whose true constituency is the permanent Uber-class of lobbyists and socialites in Washington DC. Nothing threatens her as much as the prospect that some hick populist might dare to rock the boat.

Posted by: obscure on April 14, 2007 at 3:40 PM | PERMALINK

Rush Limbaugh for radio and Bill O'Reilly for TV "news."

Both have been leaders in their broadcast fields, helped make "liberal" a dirty word, advanced neocon ideology and RNC talking points, promoted the culture wars, and contributed greatly to polarizing the body politic. They have been the "pioneers," as someone described earlier, who others imitate.

Both have been given an air of legitimacy, e.g., Rush has interviewed Bush and has been considered a source of "news" rather than non-objective opinion... Oprah hosted a show dedicated to O'Reilly.

Both have had considerable influence through their respective media's audience reach.

Both have been mouthpieces for bamboozling the public on pre-war intel that made the Iraq War initially acceptable and hyped the alleged national security creds of Repubs -- which has had a devastating effect on American foreign affairs and credibility in the world.

Both spew fear and hate in appealing to the worst of human nature.

Both are poor role models: Rush's pill-popping addiction and Dominican Republic Viagra "holiday" and O'Reilly's lurid sexual indiscretions.

They epitomize the media's authoritarian personality run amok and I consider both to be malignant narcissists and/or sociopaths.

On the print side, I don't know which is worse: WSJ editorial or Fred Hiatt's WaPo editorial. Maybe a tie.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 14, 2007 at 3:42 PM | PERMALINK

This will likely produce the typical invective in this forum, but Olbermann is among the most pretentious (I hesitate to say "most" on a planet in which Brian Wiliams is an inhabitant), with his aping of Murrow, among other obnoxious features. The refusal to book a guest who doesn't start each answer, from the preening Olbermann, with the obligatory phrase, "You're right, Keith...." is just laughable in it's cluelessness. Olbermann as an interviewer has an endless capacity to make any humorist or comedian seem as lame as a high school guidance counselor.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with others here -- Rush Limbaugh fits all those characteristics.

Besides that, he's a hypocrite and a coward, hiding behind claims he's an "entertainer" when called on his hatemongering.

Only an asshole would find Rush entertaining.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Limbaugh. I don't understand why there's even a debate on this point. He was first, he's the worst, and he continues. His technique of huge continual lies is contemptible.

Posted by: N.Wells on April 14, 2007 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

To egbert: There are so many vile implications in your post that I don't know where to begin. One, profoundly offensive to me as a Jew, is that if you're Jewish ( like Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold) you "therefore" support Israeli interest too much. All the senators have taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the US, and whatever they may think about Israel their responsibility is clear. Most seem to have no trouble with that. But beyond that, I can think of few American policies that have endangered Israel as much as this stupid war. The net result - not only predictable, but predicted by many - is that Iran is stronger, Shii'ism is stronger, therefore Hizbollah is stronger, and Israel is correspondingly more endangered. And indeed, since March 2003 Israel's security - like ours - has significantly deteriorated.

I am a Zionist, at least in the sense that I support Israel's right to exist inside secure defensible borders. As such I hope that Lieberman leaves the national scene as soon as possible. He is a liar, a self-deceiver, and a vain fool, and his natural home is not in any Democratic Party that I recognize. And whatever he thinks, he is no true friend of Israel. Nor, alas, of our country.

Posted by: Fred from Pescadero on April 14, 2007 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

Limbaugh.

Posted by: Kimmitt on April 14, 2007 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

partly because that senator happened to be Jewish and therefore supported Israeli interests too much.


Last I looked, the job of a United States Senator was to support American interests. If Lieberman wants to move to Israel and join the rest of the necons in the Likud party, let him.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

It's a toss up... Coulter, Hannity, Beck or Limbaugh!?

They're all evildoers and should be sent to another planet to spew their garbage!!

Posted by: Suzie-Q on April 14, 2007 at 3:49 PM | PERMALINK

Gotta be Nancy Grace--She has never met anyone undeserving of the death penalty!

Posted by: fd on April 14, 2007 at 3:51 PM | PERMALINK

Colbert is especially vile in the way he never says what he means, and instead attempts to parody thoughtful conservative views.

Boo fuckin' hoo. We'll call a waaahhhmbulance for you.

Just cause you lot aren't smart enough to get it.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 3:56 PM | PERMALINK

I used to work with a guy who said "I like rush limbaugh, he makes me think". when I disagreed with one of rush's obvious up-is-downisms he said "how do you know? what makes you think you know more than rush?". I don't know who was more loathsome after all that, rush or the guy who refused to recognize limbaugh for what he is.

Posted by: supersaurus on April 14, 2007 at 4:01 PM | PERMALINK

Fred from Pescadero: Thank you for your post at 3:45 from the bottom of my little Jewish heart.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 4:01 PM | PERMALINK

...considered a source of "news" rather than non-objective opinion.

The better choice would have been "subjective" opinion.

I've never been able to stand more than a minute of Nancy Grace. I think I've flipped her show on maybe twice. She's pretty vile, too.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 14, 2007 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

Michael Savage gets my vote as I don't think there's a more popular hate spewer out there. Possibly Hannity as more people probably hear him, but Savage is just a plain disgusting example of a human being.

Posted by: Fred on April 14, 2007 at 4:05 PM | PERMALINK

He's alse the one who said "screw 'em" when four Americans got killed and strung up from a bridge by terrorists.

Notice how egbert didn't mention they were mercenaries. Thanks for admitting that the truth undercuts your Bush fluffer propaganda as usual, egbert.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:08 PM | PERMALINK

Colbert is especially vile in the way he never says what he means, and instead attempts to parody thoughtful conservative views.

How can one parody that which does not exist?

Posted by: josef on April 14, 2007 at 4:10 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with many of the comments above.

Although there are those like Savage and Mark Levin who are more loathsome in their vitriol, Limbaugh paved the way for all the rest. However, the man who created Rush, Roger Ailes, must also share credit.

Posted by: Disputo on April 14, 2007 at 4:11 PM | PERMALINK

Limburger. While others in history have made a difference on the positive side of the human balance sheet, Limbaugh is the current #1 lowlife appealing, scumbag cretin who has admitted that that he's perfectly willing to sell his black soul and sell the country down the river for a buck. His excuse? "Hey, I'm just an entertainer!" He is a nasty, ruthless, hatefilled, baldfaced lying SOB and thanks in large measure to his rightwing, brownosing, amoral, ratings centered media supported fabrications the country is in the sad and divisive state it is in today. The others are only imitators - like copycat vandals or murderers who yearn for the notoriety of the the big names.

Limbaugh'd better HOPE there really is no hell.

Whew! (Sorry Kevin and cats).

Posted by: Are you kidding? on April 14, 2007 at 4:12 PM | PERMALINK

Savage, Coulter, and Michael Moore, if we can include a film maker as a media figure, are the most cynical in their pursuit of a profit, no matter what rhetoric is required. I really doubt that Coulter, Moore, and Savage (most of all) actually believe half the stuff they say, or messages they espouse. They have found very profitable market niches, however, and there is no way they are going to give them up as long as there is a buck to be made.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

"hung up the four dead Americans and said screw 'em"

Do you mean the Blackwater subsidiary who sent the four Special Ops constractors out under armed, without an armored vehicle, and unprotected? The same outfit which has fought their families for any information on how it happened and still fights their lawsuit against them?

But, O'Reilly tops the list for me - The guy simply learned where the real money was coming from - If the left had paid him more, he would be a liberal. Right wing entertainment sells.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 14, 2007 at 4:14 PM | PERMALINK

Here's another vote for Nancy "try'em and fry'em" Grace. She is truly repulsive -- and scary.

Posted by: bob5540 on April 14, 2007 at 4:15 PM | PERMALINK

Will Allen wrote:Nancy Grace is a nut. Now, to have some empathy

Don't hurt yourself, Will.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

I'm not sure if Coulter counts sinces she's clearly a rabid psychopath who possible can't help herself.

Now behind it all you can add such "luminaries" as KKKarl Rove.

Posted by: Are You Kidding? on April 14, 2007 at 4:17 PM | PERMALINK

Ann Coulter and the others are mere actors. Nancy Grace is for real.

Posted by: bob5540 on April 14, 2007 at 4:18 PM | PERMALINK

I'm not sure if Coulter counts sinces she's clearly a rabid psychopath who possibly can't help herself.

Now behind it all you can add such "luminaries" as KKKarl Rove.

Posted by: Are You Kidding? on April 14, 2007 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

"ex-liberal" wrote: Sure, there are liberals with whom I disagree, but Grace is a whole different level of meanness and dishonesty.

First of all, as was pointed out, Grace has about as much claim to the term "liberal" as "ex-liberal" does, which is to say, none at all.

Second of all, pull the other one, "ex-liberal" -- as you abundantly demonstrate, you like dishonesty. You cheer it -- at least from conservatives and neocons. If you imagine Grace is a liberal, that explains a lot.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

"ex-liberal" continued: Sorry if I was unclear. I have no idea whether Nancy Grace is liberal or conservative.

You mean you sounded off with a knee-jerk conservative reaction without knowing what the hell you're talking about? You don't say...

Her disgustingness transcends politics.

That's okay, "ex-liberal," so does yours.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:21 PM | PERMALINK

Irony alert: Will Allen complaining about pretentiousness.

Though it's no suprise Olbermann gets under his skin, given how much he calls the Bush Administration Allen sports on its dishonesty.

I've always said cognitive dissonance is the Achilles heel of the loony libertarian.

Well, cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty.

Cognitive dissonance, intellectual dishonesty and a vastly overinflated sense of their own intelligence... [/monty pypthon]

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:24 PM | PERMALINK

Colbert is especially vile in the way he never says what he means, and instead attempts to parody thoughtful conservative views.

He would if he could find any, I suppose. As it is, he parodies the views of the authoritarian Bush Cultists -- a much more target-rich environment, as these forums demonstrate.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:25 PM | PERMALINK


Tyra Banks

Posted by: joel hanes on April 14, 2007 at 4:26 PM | PERMALINK

I think Iaccoca would say Bush.

"Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening?" Iacocca writes. "Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'Stay the course.'"

"George Bush prides himself on never changing, even as the world around him is spinning out of control. God forbid someone should accuse him of flip-flopping," Iacocca writes. "There's a disturbingly messianic fervor to his certainty."

"Swagger isn't courage. Tough talk isn't courage. Courage in the twenty-first century doesn't mean posturing and bravado. Courage is a commitment to sit down at the negotiating table and talk."

"Thanks to our first MBA President, we've got the largest deficit in history, Social Security is on life support, and we've run up a half-a-trillion-dollar price tag (so far) in Iraq. And that's just for starters."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041307H.shtml

Posted by: Are You Kidding? on April 14, 2007 at 4:31 PM | PERMALINK

If this thread is any indication, Nancy Grace seems to be despised by both liberals AND conservatives.

All in all, that's pretty remarkable. There must be a special lifetime achievement Oscar for that.

Posted by: frankly0 on April 14, 2007 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK

I always thought that Nancy Grace was just a character played by Tori Spelling.

Posted by: Disputo on April 14, 2007 at 4:38 PM | PERMALINK

gosh so many choice
Tucker Faye Carlson
Greta Van Cess Pool
both for repeating factless drivel so they can
beat an irrelevant point to death

Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker on April 14, 2007 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

Most loathsome is Chris Matthews with Howard Fineman as runner up.

Unlike the Savages and Coulters Matthews and Fineman are seen as legitimate journalists.

Posted by: Nan on April 14, 2007 at 4:41 PM | PERMALINK

Nancy Grace and Glenn Beck, in that order. Given that, it's amazing to me that CNN's worst are worse than Fox News'.

Posted by: Jeremy on April 14, 2007 at 4:42 PM | PERMALINK

1) Nancy Grace...there's a dead look in her eyes that truly scares me. I think she bites the heads off chickens.
2) Bill Bennett...a talking blimp who's the definition of odious hypocrisy and who's beginning to look like Dorian Gray's portrait.
3) Suzie Orman...so perky you could kill her.
4) Michael Medved...silly, shallow man.
5) Thomas Friedman...does anybody listen to him anymore? Just six more months!
6) Bill Kristol, his dad and his mom...the family that's wrong together.
7) Everybody on that Robin & Company show on CNN.
8) Ted Nugent
9) David Horowitz...is anything he says even remotely true?
10) James Carville...a man without qualities or values, to whome everything is a game.

Posted by: jrw on April 14, 2007 at 4:44 PM | PERMALINK

Nancy Grace was a persecutor (by the Georgia Supreme Court standards), er prosecutor - Prosecutors and civil defense lawyers are seldom in the liberal camp - Criminal defense lawyers and plaintiff's trial lawyers are rarely conservative.

Yeah, tough talk by Iacocca - Now, will he admit that not moving the gas tank forward of the rear axle cost lives and maimed many - Will he admit that defying reinforcing of the sides and tops of mini truck cabs has cost untold injuries and deaths. This man has a slew of old sins, he has never settled. And enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 14, 2007 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

There are plenty of worthy candidates above, but what about Robert Novak?

Posted by: Judy on April 14, 2007 at 4:46 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory, you'd be a decent sub for Olbermann, given your similarities, including a narrowmindedness which cannot cognitively process the notion that there are people with differing views. Now, given our host kevin requested that the language be entertaining rather than offensive, I'd be quite happy to avoid any further exchanges with you.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory, Don't dog Will Allen too much. I watch Olbermann often because he and I are about on the same political wavelenght. I like his regular liberal guests a lot. Often he is on point, but you have to admit that as much as he would like to be, he isn't Edward R. Murrow.

That said, and giving a great big honorable mention to Chris (I don't listen to anything) Matthews, I have to say the creepiest television personality going is Nancy Grace. Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are entertainers. They play their roles with gusto. Their private lives demonstrate that they are essentially hypocrites. Grace, however, is vile and repulsive on her good days. On her bad days she probably should be locked up. She is a woman without a moral compass trading on the memory of her murdered boyfriend (or was it husband.)

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 14, 2007 at 4:53 PM | PERMALINK

Irony alert: Will Allen complaining about narrowmindedness....

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:55 PM | PERMALINK

Often he is on point, but you have to admit that as much as he would like to be, he isn't Edward R. Murrow.

Of course he isn't, Ron, but I submit we could use more journalists trying to be ERM and fewer trying to be Rush Limbaugh.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

Will Allen, there I go and defend you and while I am writing you have to give Gregory ammunition. Too many posts on this thread.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 14, 2007 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

Ron - help me out here. Isn't Cashill a mock-worthy hoot - and an embarrassment to Kansas Citians everywhere? (Hell, he's an embarrassment to people who changed planes at KCI once.)

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, sweet Jesus, off-the-scale irony alert: Will Allen complaining about a lack of respect for other people's opinions...

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 5:00 PM | PERMALINK

I have a change of pace. Now that Imus has bit the dust, which of the crazies is going to "shock jock" himself off the air? Howard Stern? Rush Limbaugh? Glenn Beck?

My pick is Rush Limbaugh. He nearly killed himself with Michael J. Fox. He seems capable of saying something similar to what Imus said about the Rutgers Womens B-Ball Team.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 14, 2007 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

Nancy Grace. She didn't have the courage to do her show the day the Georgia AG announced there was no evidence in the case against the Duke lacrosse players.

Posted by: PetervE on April 14, 2007 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

Don't see their names here, so I thought John Gibson and Peggy Noonan at least deserve mention, espcially Peggy since she has (or once had) real influence.

I think Matthews, while enormously maddening at times, is at least not biased to the right. And at times he really shines. His big weakness seems to be his obsequiousness to the powerful.

And while it's hard to argue against Limbaugh as numero uno, I don't find him quite as vile as Hannity, who is a one-trick pony with his in-your-face self-righteously repeated straw-man questions.

Posted by: Fel on April 14, 2007 at 5:04 PM | PERMALINK

While whole-heartedly agreeing with the usual suspects that have been nominated, there’s one person so far unnamed whose special blend of ignorance, ideology, and cocksuredness are like fingernails on a blackboard: John Stossel.

Posted by: Civil-rights lawyer on April 14, 2007 at 5:05 PM | PERMALINK

Blue Girl, this is a national blog. Thankfully, ,I don't think anybody outside of Kansas City really knows Jack Cashill.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 14, 2007 at 5:06 PM | PERMALINK

This will likely produce the typical invective in this forum, but Olbermann is among the most pretentious . . . with his aping of Murrow, among other obnoxious features.

Actually, this bugs me too, and I loathe the Bush administration just as much as I'm sure Olbermann does. I think too many lefties get off on the cliched "speaking truth to power" attitude, as if they're risking their lives to stand firm against the overwhelming forces of fascism. (It's the left-wing equivalent of writers who make impassioned defenses of Western Civilization against the Islamist menace, and think they're being bold and original for doing so - the guys Atrios calls the "101st Fighting Keyboarders.")

For those of us who view American politics through a more historically-based, long-term, and staunchly moderate/non-partisan view, the only unique aspect of the current situation is the breathtaking incompetence of the Bush administration and the degree to which they've turned world opinion against us. It's going to take many years to undo the damage they've done, but we'll figure it out, and no amount of preening from Olbermann will make any difference. The notion that we're somehow sliding into fascism for the first time, or that today's political speech is more noxious than ever before, is bullshit. American politics has always been infested with assholes, and always will be.

In about, say, thirty years, if the NKs or Pakistanis haven't nuked us already, there will be new Bill O'Reillys, Ann Coulters, and Dick Cheneys demanding that the president unilaterally carpet-bomb some poor third-world nation and grant unlimited powers to the Ministrys of Love, Truth, and Peace, and as usual, we'll go through several hellish years of incompetence and worldwide scorn, and have to listen to another crop of hysterical fools predicting a fascist takeover. Yawn.

Posted by: Nat on April 14, 2007 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

HE is a mighty fine specimen of wingnuttery. I just want to share the hilarity! He can go from the sublime to the ridiculous in .6 seconds.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 5:11 PM | PERMALINK

Must say I'm surprised that Hugh Hewitt isn't represented in the comments. But my vote is for Fred Barnes, who with multiple platforms to peddle his dishonest prattle, can't get his arms around the fact that his life's work is worthless. Michael Barone deserves an honorable mention.

Posted by: Mark on April 14, 2007 at 5:18 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin Drum apparently didn't (literally) get the memo: Media Matters has already compiled what I call an "Index Opprobrium" listing those who abuse the public airwaves with their hate.

I invite all righteous defenders of the truth and other comrades to drive these haters from the airwaves.

Posted by: The Annoying LonewackoDotCom on April 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

egbert--just what the world needs: "Idiots for Lieberman" party

Couric is definitely high on my list--I'm amazed only two other people mentioned this sniveling hairball.

I don't seem much difference between the O'Reillys, Becks, Hannitys, Krauthammers, etc.--they all pretty much suck, even if in slightly different terms. But for my cosmic karma, I would make Alan Colmes disappear--for an attempt to legitimize Hannity, even if only superficially. Actually, it would be even better if his entire family--aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.--be sucked into a vortex. Why? He is the most "liberal" of the bunch.

WaPo's Cohen is at least as insidious as David Brooks, but less so than Mark Steyn--which is why Steyn is not a big threat. He's a caricature of himself. And do we still have Stossel to kick around? He was always my favorite asshole on TV, but I have not had a TV in almost 5 years.

Posted by: buck turgidson on April 14, 2007 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

I think too many lefties get off on the cliched "speaking truth to power" attitude, as if they're risking their lives to stand firm against the overwhelming forces of fascism.

Funny; for me it seems more like they're calling bullshit that much of the mainstream media doesn't, and that doing so it entirely appropriate.

Perhaps you could name one of those lefties whose attitude is "as if they're risking their lives to stand firm against the overwhelming forces of fascism"?

And do you agree that if the President or prominent members of the Administration lie -- or even make assertions contrary to established fact, if you please -- the media should point this fact out?

Thanks in advance for addressing these questions.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

Mort Kondracke was my Wanker of the Week a couple of weeks ago.

I'm having a hard time picking just one. (Kinda why I'm over here instead of posting at my place like I should be.)

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 14, 2007 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

I think Olbermann deserves a medal. No one else on a network news show has half his guts.

Who else compares, even a little?

Posted by: cld on April 14, 2007 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory, when I vist here, I have quite a few civil exchanges, but never with the likes of you or a few others, because you can barely tolerate the thought that somebody may think differently than you. Thus, it is you who nearly always leads off with the hostile invective. This thread, and the one below, are two good examples. You have the soul of a political officer in the Soviet Army, ever vigilant to attack incorrect thought with the utmost hostility, in the never ending effort to defend your ideoogical orthodoxy.

Why were you compelled to personally attack me in a thread pertaining to media fgures, highjacking it for your silly little tiff with me? What is wrong with you?

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 5:25 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory,

You make a great point. Perhaps the most obnoxious people on television are not the partisans of either stripe. No, the most annoying are the ass kissers pretending to be journalists who, out of fear of losing access, or risking their big salaries and fancy benefits packages, refuse to call bullshit on the people of power regardless of party they are supposed to be covering. At long last maybe the class represented by Tim Russert, Brian Williams and Wolf Blitzer are the most loathsome people on television.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 14, 2007 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK

Isn't amazing that so many loathesome, dishcnest hacks such as those listed in the comments above have come to dominate our media since the Republicans ditched the Fairness Doctrine back in the 1980's.

Posted by: virgil on April 14, 2007 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK

Will Allen:

Michael Moore picks on the right targets. Ground zero for satire. Can someone explain how he gets in the same breath as Limbaugh?

Olbermann runs the closest thing to a network journalism newscast we have today. I'll take a pound of his pretentiousness over an ounce of the beltway inbred millionaires pretending they stick up for the little guy.

--

Oh, and just for the heck of it, a seasoned hand in the "used to really do it, but got fat, lazy and out of touch, got fired for plagiarism, and mounted the prototypical white-guy media comeback": Mike Barnicle. I can't believe I'm the first to pop that zit on the mediascape today.

Posted by: ThresherK on April 14, 2007 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK

BlueGirlRedState--While we're figuring out what to not call Shrub, let's also scratch "oil man" off the list: He's never found any that wasn't dripping off a dipstick.

Posted by: ThresherK on April 14, 2007 at 5:36 PM | PERMALINK

Tom Friedman, the neo-liberal foreign affairs columnist for the NY Times.

Why? Thinks the untrammeled free market economy automatically leads to utopia. Note: US for most of its history was a high tariff country.

Always gives Bush another six months to get it right in Iraq.

Writes well, thinks badly.

Posted by: Dr Wu , the last of the big-time thinkers on April 14, 2007 at 5:38 PM | PERMALINK

Tom Silva is the biggest asshole. Kick him from This Old House. Tom, why don't you try discerning what that gadget really is, for a change. Richard and Roger know what it is, but they're just being playful. You have no idea.

No. It's Not a Popcorn holder. For God's sake, you're on a home improvement show. Think Building products. Thank you, Kevin. It's a caulk spreader. That's what it is, stupid. You'll look like an idiot while you hold your popcorn with a caulk spreader. And You look so smug, like it's all a fun and games. People are Dying.

Posted by: absent observer on April 14, 2007 at 5:39 PM | PERMALINK

I really can't single any one person out. Those folks have simply learned to work a system that rewards loathsomeness handsomely. It's fun to bash Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly, etc., but our real efforts need to be aimed at fixing a broken media system and somehow rescue the work of informing the public from the profit motive.

Posted by: dr sardonicus on April 14, 2007 at 5:42 PM | PERMALINK

Awesome question, Kevin.
I am most repulsed by Sean Hannity and forward to his eventual dismissal.
I cannot stand how he repeats the same phrase in a most orwellian way to make his point,
pounding his sentences to the point of a feeling of unreality...
A loud, overbearing, domineering, judgmental macho creepitoid ideologue, he lives to silence critics. He looks evil to the core. I feel unhealthy when exposed to him.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 5:44 PM | PERMALINK

Matt Drudge (and his MSM groupies)

Posted by: tosser on April 14, 2007 at 5:48 PM | PERMALINK

What does it say that Judith Miller isn`t yet mentioned? She had some star status. Does her claim of credibility protect her from getting on the list?

One could say that the seperation of responsibilities leaves a lot of the people mentioned free to argue they are just doing their job.

Some get money trough getting power, trough getting votes trough making talking points ("bullets") trough looking for emotionally apealing dirt.

Others make money trough advertising trough ratings/sales/pageviews (square meters of eyeball) by making emotionaly apealing TV, radio or reading material. What cheaper way than using talking points handed in for free?

Judith Miller combined (anti-wmd?) agenda powered emotional manipulative reporting with looking for only those bits of dirt that helped her make her case... Even if these were handed to her by a PR agent known for starting wars. Even if these bits were considered technically impossible by the more independant experts she spoke to.

She created lies while working a lie filtering job, others only play a halve of this game.

I guess its a variation of the "I dont use weapons I just sell them" / "Ofcourse I use weapons someone just sold them to everyone around me" argument.

Posted by: rtrt on April 14, 2007 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

Ron Byers: At long last maybe the class represented by Tim Russert, Brian Williams and Wolf Blitzer are the most loathsome people on television.

Yeah, I can understand your point. I would proffer that there are two loathsome media camps: the screaming chainsaws and the insidious toxins. Perhaps like the Oscars, they divide into the Best Actors and the Best Supporting Actors in a Worst Media category.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 14, 2007 at 5:50 PM | PERMALINK


limbaugh.....for attacking a teenage girl...on the air..

chelsea clinton...


Posted by: mr. irony on April 14, 2007 at 5:50 PM | PERMALINK

God, I'm shocked. I'd have figured Coulter to be a mortal lock here!

Posted by: asfl on April 14, 2007 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

An anecdote:

I have an old dog. Whenever anyone passes by on the sidewalk, she barks her fool head off. When we're having dinner, she barks her fool head off whether there's anyone there or not.

The noise she makes doesn't add any particular value, but she knows who's in charge and she's doing what she perceives as her job, especially when she thinks she might get rewarded.

If she could talk, she'd fit into corporate media just fine.

Posted by: Gregory on April 14, 2007 at 5:53 PM | PERMALINK

Thank you sir, can I have another?
Bill Kristol. He is a most unctuous man. I cringe when I see him on teevee.
Without disclosing that he participated in composing Dubya's 2nd inaugural speech, Kristol went around praising it. Little man syndrome.
He made the dishonest statement "There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America ... that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular."
That is one of the most fraudulent statements in the universe.
He belongs on unbalanced Fox News since it's mainly lies anyway.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 6:09 PM | PERMALINK

Would Rupert Murdock and Roger Ailes (sp) qualify?

They, IMO, do much more harm than any of their employees, because they perpetuate the whole lying mess called Fox News.

Because of this, I boycott everthing Fox, cable, network, movies, you name it. I would boycott their sponsors, if I had any idea who they were.

Blowhard Rush, Vicious Annie, most everybody besides Crazy Gracie, would fade away if Fox were done away with. They gave, and continue to give, faux credibility to the Bush/Cheney Incompetence Corporation, allowing that self delusional 28% of Americans who still live in denial to keep their idiotic faith alive.

Fox has helped to put us where we are today. That should pretty much say enough right there to give my arguement weight.

Now I'm hungry, and shall go feed my anger.

;

Posted by: alapip on April 14, 2007 at 6:12 PM | PERMALINK

I am surprised Bill Kristol hasn't been mentionad more often. He writes for TIME, edits one of the more well known conservative magazines, and is on TV all the time.

The man is a war monger, a total Bush supporter and wants an immediate invasion of Iraq.Most of the people described in the comments are really caricatures and although I would get rid of all of them, Kristol seems to have the most influence on the thinking of the Bush administration. He has been with them from the beginning (actually, before) and is truly dangerous.

.

Posted by: Rene ala Carte on April 14, 2007 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

Everybody's favorite drug-addled, limp-dicked chaser of Dominican boy prostitutes: Rush Limbaugh.

Without him, their whole house of cards would fall. If he'd never existed, they likely wouldn't have a house of cards.

Posted by: TCinLA on April 14, 2007 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

It would have to be Glenn Beck. Not because his opinions are more loathsome than Limbaugh's or O'Reilly's, but because he doesn't have even their reptilian charm. Say what you will about those other two, they at least have some faux gravitas and "professional" speaking voices. Beck shares all their odious qualities, but exudes a smarmy, antic, class president air. He acts like he won the chance to be on CNN at his high school auction.

Posted by: Peter on April 14, 2007 at 6:28 PM | PERMALINK

ThresherK, whatever you may think of Moore's targets, when a film maker edits an interview to change the very meaning of what was said by the interview subject, that is loathsome.

If Olbermann is such an outstanding journalist, why does almost never have a guest with views that differ with his? Does being an outstanding journalist preclude inquiry which may encounter views which differ? Or is Olbermann omniscient, thereby precluding any need for such an encounter? To head off any battles with strawmen, no I'm not saying the likes of Limbaugh are better (he is worse in many ways), but at least Limbaugh has less pretense regarding whether he in a neutral observer, or that he is running a news program.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINK

Am I the only person that listens to Air America. He's no longer on the air but Al Franken was the most Boaring loathsome person I've heard.

Posted by: TruthPolitik on April 14, 2007 at 6:31 PM | PERMALINK

Will Allen:

Please follow your own advice: "I'd be happy to avoid any further exchanges with you."

But before we show you the door, I'd really, really like to commend you for your unceasing efforts to demonstrate how user-friendly computers are nowadays, that bipeds lacking frontal lobes and opposable thumbs (you) can use them, just like real actual human beings do.

Posted by: TCinLA on April 14, 2007 at 6:31 PM | PERMALINK

Noron.

Posted by: Hedley Lamarr on April 14, 2007 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

Olbermann has to introduce Joe Scarborough every evening--doesn't that count as a person with differing views?

As for bothersome females, Ann Coulter and Paris Hilton ruin things for the rest of us
good looking blondes. Blonde jokes re-emerged when they came on the scene!!

I can't stand how over-exposed, empty and vacant both are. I have a visceral reaction to seeing them.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 6:38 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin Drum?

Posted by: egbert on April 14, 2007 at 6:38 PM | PERMALINK

Another shining example of open mindedness, TC, congratulations. Heaven forbid that you encounter someone who doesn't conform to your views.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 14, 2007 at 6:40 PM | PERMALINK

Where to begin?

Posted by: BroD on April 14, 2007 at 6:48 PM | PERMALINK

I agree that Limbaugh is the ultimate progenitor of the right wing freak show and probably deserves to be number one.

A name I haven't seen mentioned so far, but whose self-importance and ridiculous pretension to objectivity make him particularly galling, is Brit Hume's. He's a right twit.

Posted by: jmk on April 14, 2007 at 6:50 PM | PERMALINK

Sometimes it seems like Chris Matthews has a crush on Dubya. And one minute he is a liberal, the next a conservative. He is not a bully, but he certainly interrupts and must have missed the classes on give-and-take in conversational discourse! I always thought Matthews had a cute laugh.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

Tony Kornheiser, because he made Monday Night Football unwatchable in just one year.

Posted by: Zathras on April 14, 2007 at 6:55 PM | PERMALINK

All the other names sound more or less familiar, but who the hell is Michael Levin?

Posted by: gregor on April 14, 2007 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

Donald Trump - even though he may well vote Democratic.

Trump could perhaps be a living archetype of humans evolving to an advanced plane of yuckiness.

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on April 14, 2007 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

It's Grace. Limbaugh and his ilk lie with nearly every breath they take. But the target of their mendacity is generally someone like Nancy Pelosi, who is powerful and has resources with which to defend herself.

By contrast, Grace's victims are generally poor schmucks like Richard Jewell or that day laborer that painted Elizabeth Smart's house, woefully out of their depth in one of Grace's pitchfork parties. Ironically, Grace really seems to have screwed up with Duke case. Taking the side of a black accuser against white defendants from a rich Southern university: talk about not knowing your audience.

While we're on the subject of tele-lynching, surely Chris Hansen deserves a dishonorable mention.

Posted by: kth on April 14, 2007 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

Olbermann has said repeatedly, once or twice on air even, that although his staff continues to try, they are unable to persuade conservatives to come on his show and defend themselves. Early on, he had a few and treated them with respect, but now they're too afraid. The right-wingers are even afraid of Stephen Colbert and mostly won't go on his show.

My vote here would ahve to go to Rush Limbaugh, but for the embodiment of sheer addled dishonest loathesomeness, Hannity comes damn close.

Posted by: gyrfalcon on April 14, 2007 at 7:07 PM | PERMALINK

Posted above: "...Limbaugh has less pretense...."

I passed by a hopelessly right wing co-worker who had his radio show on this past week, with Limbaugh discussing the Imus dismissals.
My impression was that Little Rushie seemed worried about his one of many despicable moments where he made fun of physically disabled Michael J Fox--- like he too could be taken off the air.
He is absolutely deserving of a mention for worst media characters.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK

Hannity is O'Reilly without a sense of humor. Bill-O can be self-deprecating when he's not doing his own show, but Hannity can't turn it off.

But Limbaugh is s the first and the worst. All others pale next to him.

Posted by: shnooky on April 14, 2007 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK

Rita Cosby.

She has a face for radio, and a voice for print.

Posted by: Armen on April 14, 2007 at 7:22 PM | PERMALINK

Since I now have a gym near work, the choice has to be Bill O'Reilly and Michelle Malkin.

Oh, you can watch King of the Hill reruns also.
Agreed that Brian Williams is the most GOP of all the evening newscasts. But wasn't Katie Couric a Democrat before she went to CBS?

Posted by: mikeel on April 14, 2007 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

Wow! 147 comments and only one mention of Robert Novak? He needs a better PR guy.

Posted by: fostert on April 14, 2007 at 7:41 PM | PERMALINK

So many assholes, so little time.

Can we just euthanize everybody on this roll call of mendacity and hypocrisy? Except Stewart and Colbert.

Fred from Pescadero, right on!

My new hero. You and BG.

Posted by: FitterDon on April 14, 2007 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

No one mentioned the guy who said this


1) "You work three jobs? … Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that." --to a divorced mother of three, Omaha, Nebraska, Feb. 4, 2005

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

What bugs me about Chris Matthews is that huge mouth that seems to be almost unable to hold the saliva in when he's launching into one of his beating around the Bush points.

Posted by: eeeuuuu! on April 14, 2007 at 8:00 PM | PERMALINK

CW always,

The would be the preznut.

You may find this interesting from Eric Alterman, The Many Man-Crushes of Chris Matthews:

Like anyone who spends much time on live TV, Chris Matthews tends to say a lot of silly things. (I did too during the two years I was so employed.) But patterns and passions tell a tale, and those exhibited by Matthews are revealing. Like Elvis, Matthews can't help falling in love. And also like the King--who developed a thing for both Richard Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover late in life--the object of Matthews's affection is invariably a tough-talking, self-styled Republican macho-man. And when he gets going on one of these guys, his style of punditry owes more to, say, Tiger Beat or Teen People than the Trilateral Commission.
Going back to 9/11, Matthews found himself blown away not by Bush's political or military response but by his ability to throw a baseball. He compared the man to--I kid you not--Ernest Hemingway. "There are some things you can't fake," he explained breathlessly. "Either you can throw a strike from sixty feet or you can't. Either you can rise to the occasion on the mound at Yankee Stadium with 56,000 people watching or you can't. On Tuesday night, George W. Bush hit the strike zone in the House that Ruth Built.... This is about knowing what to do at the moment you have to do it--and then doing it. It's about that 'grace under pressure' that Hemingway gave as his very definition of courage."
And remember that now-infamous Mission Accomplished moment? True, Matthews did not join his guest G. Gordon Liddy in admiring--still not kidding--the President's pretend penis, but he was no less focused on Bush's fashion statements. "He looks great in a military uniform. He looks great in that cowboy costume he wears when he goes West," he cooed. "We're proud of our President. Americans love having a guy as President, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton.... Women like a guy who's President. Check it out."
Matthews's man-crush on Bush continued longer than that of most of the mainstream media, leading him, for instance, to assert that "everybody sort of likes the President, except for the real whack-jobs," at a moment when the percentage of Americans telling New York Times/CBS pollsters that they "liked" Bush had fallen to 37 percent.
But nobody, save Fred Barnes, thinks Bush is cool anymore, and so Matthews has had to go cruising for a new crush. For a while it looked as if he and John McCain would hook up. "A lot of people," he explained coyly, naming no names, "like the cut of John McCain's jib, his independence, his maverick reputation." This led Matthews to declare the election all but over, announcing that as far as he was concerned, McCain "deserves the presidency."
This was just a warmup, however, for Chris's latest flame: the "perfect candidate"--the one who "looks like a President," who "acts and talks like a President," who "rises to the occasion" and is "the one tough cop who was standing on the beat when we got hit last time and stood up and took it," and who, to top it all off, got "that pee smell out of that subway." Say one thing about Chris Matthews, once he switches loyalties, he's really loyal. He got so mad at that meanie Hillary Clinton for wanting to be President against his new love, Rudy G, he gave a big fat warning to her homies about her husband. Again, I promise I'm not kidding. When Hillary staffer Ann Lewis showed up on Hardball, she was instructed three times by its host that Bill Clinton had "better watch it." And when former DNC chair Terry McAuliffe came on to promote his book, Matthews told him six times that Clinton had better "behave himself," lest his "social life" become a "distraction."
More here.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 14, 2007 at 8:08 PM | PERMALINK

My choice for most loathsome media personality in America has got to be Joe "Primary Colors by Anonymous" Klein, hands down. I consider him, far and away, the most patently dishonest political pundit in journalism.

It's true that Joe Klein is neither a bully-cum-sociopath like Bill O'Reilly, nor a proudly pompous ignoramus like Glenn Beck. He's most certainly not a crass right-wing political hack like Bob Novak, and he's hardly a pungently noxious GOP neocon tool like Anne Coulter. On the contrary, Klein's probably one of the most naturally articulate and politically perceptive commentators and analysts in his field.

HOWEVER -- when one considers his personal honesty, professional integrity and moral fiber, well, Joe Klein summarily chucked all three into the sewer using both hands and arms, with the writing and publication of a thinly-veiled political drive-by hit of Bill and Hillary Clinton, his entertaining but nevertheless infamous 1996 novel Primary Colors, under that cowardly pseudonymn, Anonymous.

When his identity was tentatively breached by media gossips, he summarily and very publicly denied the allegation. But once it was confirmed that he had indeed lied to both his editos and the general public regarding his authorship of Primary Colors, Klein was summarily suspended before being fired by his then-employer, Newsweek. He was later hired in the same capacity by TIME, to the discredit of that formerly venerable publication.

Talk to his true peers in his chosen profession -- not those self-promoting bobble-heads on cable and network TV, but the longtime local political columnists and reporters who are perfectly content with the notion that their fame will probably not transcend much beyond county or state lines during the course of their professional lives.

You'll find that a surprising number of them hold the opinion that Joe Klein is a prodigious waste of genuine talent, forever compromised by his propensity to place fame and fortune before ethics and integrity. Personally, I think they're being charitable.

Joe Klein is a coldly calculating, Beltway-based sycophant predisposed to shooting only those politicians or public figures whom he perceives to be wounded and lame (as evidenced by last week's drive-by hit on George W. Bush). He follows no moral compass, but instead first gauges the current direction of the prevailing political winds, before meticulously crafting his to-be-published wares accordingly to maximize his own personal benefit.

Ladies and gentlemen, meet Joe Klein -- unabashed political coward, kiss-ass, and media whore.

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on April 14, 2007 at 8:16 PM | PERMALINK

Zathras: "Tony Kornheiser, because he made Monday Night Football unwatchable in just one year."

If that's truly the case, then his mentor was Dennis Miller.

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on April 14, 2007 at 8:25 PM | PERMALINK

#1 Chris Matthews. #2 Tucker Carlson. #3 Mike Barnicle.

Posted by: JoeCHI on April 14, 2007 at 8:29 PM | PERMALINK

JoeCHI: "#1 Chris Matthews. #2 Tucker Carlson. #3 Mike Barnicle."

Well, I normally don't accept bets on the Trifecta until 20 minutes before the 9th race ...

Posted by: William Bennett, the Bookie of Virtue on April 14, 2007 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

Great post, Apollo 13--I had not seen that one.


Now, no one mentioned this guy as a contender:

9) "You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." --interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

8) "Anybody who is in a position to serve this country ought to understand the consequences of words." --interview with Rush Limbaugh, Nov. 1, 2006

7) "I think -- tide turning -- see, as I remember -- I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of -- it's easy to see a tide turn -- did I say those words?" --asked if the tide was turning in Iraq, Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

Posted by: consider wisely on April 14, 2007 at 8:58 PM | PERMALINK

TruthPolitik: "He's no longer on the air but Al Franken was the most Boaring loathsome person I've heard."

I happen to have liked Al Franken's show, and I do miss it. He almost always had interesting guests on to dscuss relevant issues in a civil manner, and his weekly conversations with regular contributors like Christie Harvey, David Brock, Joe Conasan and Tom Oliphant were always topical and informative.

But I'll be honest, and admit that Al Franken's program was most definitely an acquired taste. Therefore, I can't begrudge you your opinion of the man.

Listening to Franken's show, one might get the sense of what it might have been like to have been privy to such political conversations as might have taken place in Paris salons of the early 20th century.

If a listener tuned in to "The Al Franken Show" expecting to be entertained by over-the-top exchanges of political bombast between host and callers, accompanied perhaps by raucous sidekick antics and outrageous "They can't say that on the air, can they?"-type commentary, no doubt he or she would have been mostly disappointed -- even if a number of his infrequent comedy bits were truly inspired.

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on April 14, 2007 at 9:12 PM | PERMALINK

Lou Dobbs

Posted by: Brojo on April 14, 2007 at 9:42 PM | PERMALINK

Mark Levin is really disgusting. When traveling near New York on business I sometimes come across Mark Levin on WABC. He just piles the crap on deeper and deeper making outrageous claims and statements without ever backing them up. I can imagine that if you listened to that filth day after day it would warp your viewpoint on life.

Posted by: JohnK on April 14, 2007 at 10:19 PM | PERMALINK

I don't watch T.V. or p.listen to radio much (car radio is broke), so I'll go with what I know: Eric Olsen, head of Blogcritics. Thinks having a big record collection makes hime an expert on everything. P.U.

Posted by: godoggo on April 14, 2007 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

The reason Mark Levin rings my bell is that he's simultaneously 1) openly fascist to a degree that most of the other wingnut talkers are afraid to go, and 2) a lawyer.

Posted by: s9 on April 15, 2007 at 12:17 AM | PERMALINK

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, I'd rank Ann Coulter higher on the priority list of people to get rid of, but I'm not entirely sure we haven't already come to be rid of Coulter. Levin will be a lot more difficult to put away. He's going to be causing trouble for a long time.

Posted by: s9 on April 15, 2007 at 12:19 AM | PERMALINK

Most vicious and vile radio blatherer: M. Savage

Most smug interrupterer of others (especially if they are female): Krauthammer

Most longwinded, dry, out-of-his field blowhard: V Hanson Davis

Biggest Harpy: Coulter

Liar and hypocrite: "I'm a moderate" O'Reilly

Should know better but wants the money: Murdoch

Pretends to be an even-handed comedian: Jay Leno

Intellectually challenged and uncurious comedian: Bill Maher

Psuedo-intellectual: T. Friedman

I'll sleep with anyone and believe anything they say: J. Miller

Abdication of journalistic responsibility: Too many to count

Posted by: mcdruid on April 15, 2007 at 2:37 AM | PERMALINK

Coulter does, at least, get the palm of honor for actually managing to get fired from the National Review. Pretty amazing, considering their standards.

I mention Leno because of his place as a lap-dog to the Republicans. During the 2000 elections, he allowed the Bushies to edit Shrub's appearance on his show. It was also obvious that he gave them a list of the jokes he intended to tell, as Shrub responded to some of them with pre-prepared props.

Posted by: mcdruid on April 15, 2007 at 2:46 AM | PERMALINK

Hearing a Bush voter complain about dishonesty in politicians and filmmakers is like hearing someone stupid enough to blame the Democrats for Pol Pot complain about dishonest rhetoric.

Posted by: noel on April 15, 2007 at 3:31 AM | PERMALINK

Jonah Goldberg is my least favorite. He's just... completely cluless. He drives me insane.

Posted by: Caitlin on April 15, 2007 at 4:23 AM | PERMALINK


catlin....that maybe but this made me laugh...


Bush "is spending money like a pimp with a week to live." - Jonah Goldberg 2/12/06

Posted by: mr. irony on April 15, 2007 at 6:04 AM | PERMALINK

All great choices. I think you have to refine the list. Loathsome "journalists," which would cover the Uber-Weenie, Chris Matthews; loathsome "commentators," which would enable us to bitch-slap Hannity-Limbaugh-Coulter, et al., without equating them with actual journalism; and loathsome talking heads, which would enable us to dog-pile on Dobson, "the Colonel" (Hunt), Liddy, et al.

But what I really think this shows is that there is no line separating journalists from anyone else with an opinion anymore -- and that could be bad for the Republic.

Posted by: Hemlock for Gadflies on April 15, 2007 at 9:54 AM | PERMALINK

The person who forged the Niger yellowcake "official" documents.

Posted by: Stephen Kriz on April 15, 2007 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK

Lou Dobbs
Posted by: Brojo

It's fairly obvious to me that you haven't read Lou Dobbs. But then you voted for Ralphie...

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 15, 2007 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

TruthPolitik: "He's no longer on the air but Al Franken was the most Boaring loathsome person I've heard."

With any luck Franken's new forum will be the US Senate.

Posted by: nepeta on April 15, 2007 at 4:14 PM | PERMALINK

On the surface, I'd like to see these people given the old "trading places" treatment. How sweet would it be to see BOR and Coulter beside a dumpster scrapping over a stale bagel? Or Malkin berating Hannity's alchohol induced ED, her screeches floating across the trailer park? How about Rush pedaling fake Viagra in a public restroom?
I still get chills when I recall Judy Miller choking down prison chow to cover Scooter's a$$. Ahhhh...good times.

Posted by: y work? on April 15, 2007 at 5:06 PM | PERMALINK

Can we place Malkin and Hannity in a Thai whorehouse instead? Some decent folks whose only sin is being poor inhabit trailer parks. They don't deserve those two...

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 15, 2007 at 5:17 PM | PERMALINK

The Journal Editorial Report used to be on a local pbs station, but not any longer.

It's on every week on Fox. Same format with Paul Gigot

Posted by: rdw on April 15, 2007 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory:

Perhaps you could name one of those lefties whose attitude is "as if they're risking their lives to stand firm against the overwhelming forces of fascism"?

I live in the SF Bay area, so I hear this sort of shit all the time, everywhere I go. I've also heard it from family members gushing over Olbermann. It isn't very prevalent in mainstream national discourse - most left/liberal commentators are more intelligent and serious than that. Olbermann with his Murrow act is simply targeting an audience that eats it up.

I do see that attitude with plenty of posters on this site, though, although I think the knee-jerk reactions to anyone with dissenting views bug me more. I don't find partisan circle-jerks very enlightening, which is why I don't read Red State or Free Republic, and probably need to stop reading these comments.

And do you agree that if the President or prominent members of the Administration lie -- or even make assertions contrary to established fact, if you please -- the media should point this fact out?

Absolutely, and I have a bumper sticker that simply says "IMPEACH." And frankly, I have no problem with partisan journalists like Olbermann - I'd rather watch him than some high-minded phony like Brian Williams - and I agree that the media cult of objectivity is stupid, which is why I tend to read more opinionated sources (here, TNR, The Nation, Reason, Slate, Salon) than normal news. I just don't care for posturing and chest-beating. It doesn't take any bravery or moral fortitude to say loudly and publicly that Bush has been criminally incompetent and has violated his oath to uphold the Constitution.

Posted by: Nat on April 15, 2007 at 6:18 PM | PERMALINK

What Fred said.

Posted by: Brautigan on April 15, 2007 at 10:16 PM | PERMALINK

Al Franken and Bill Maher

Posted by: Luther on April 16, 2007 at 1:51 AM | PERMALINK

rdw: It's on every week on Fox.


speaking of.....f--o--x....

A new survey of 1,502 adults released Sunday by Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that despite the mass appeal of the Internet and cable news since a previous poll in 1989, Americans' knowledge of national affairs has slipped a little.

Pew judged the levels of knowledgeability (correct answers) among those surveyed and found that those who scored the highest were regular watchers of Comedy Central's The Daily Show and Colbert Report. They tied with regular readers of major newspapers in the top spot -- with 54% of them getting 2 out of 3 questions correct.

Virtually bringing up the rear were regular watchers of Fox News. Only 1 in 3 could answer 2 out of 3 questions correctly.


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003571876

Posted by: mr. irony on April 16, 2007 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

Marvin Olasky

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 5:40 PM | PERMALINK

Matthews is an utter hack. I remember when Katharina van den Heuvens (sp?) was on Hardball a few years ago (before popular sentiment turned against the war), she listed the lies the Bush administration used to sell the war. Matthews looked at her and said "If that's tue, then Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al all lied to get us into an unnecessary war. Can you really be accusing them of being so dishonest?" (or words to that effect) as if that were such an outrageous idea as to be literally outside the realm of possibility.

Now that public opinion has turned against the war Matthews, who was as enthusiastic a cheerleader for the war as anyone in the media, now claims to have been "against it from the start."

Posted by: Jack Hughes on April 17, 2007 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

Bill O'Reilly,
How anyone could take him seriously,
after forcing himself on a subordinate co-worker that had NO intrest in the creep.
The thought of him saying oh baby you turn me on, by the way I have a vibrator up my Butt.
All is forgivin it the Sick Right Wing World.

Posted by: skibumlee on April 18, 2007 at 11:57 AM | PERMALINK

It's fairly obvious to me that you haven't read Lou Dobbs. But then you voted for Ralphie

I'm sorry you do not like me. I have not read Lou Dobbs, but I have seen him on TV. He is a misanthrope.

Posted by: Brojo on April 21, 2007 at 12:55 AM | PERMALINK

MESSAGE

Posted by: ISHMAel back on March 5, 2008 at 8:10 AM | PERMALINK

MESSAGE

Posted by: ISHMAel back on March 5, 2008 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINK

MESSAGE

Posted by: ISHMAel back on March 5, 2008 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINK

MESSAGE

Posted by: ISHMAel back on March 5, 2008 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly