An article that just kicks the **ever-lovin' shit** out of Tim Russert. Enjoy.

[WilliamPitt]

I sure as hell did. Russert is so full of shit, he squeaks going into a turn; you can smell him coming two counties away.

Thanks for helping Cheney's hatchet-men blow up a WMD-hunting CIA NOC agent, Timmy. Valerie Plame, remember?

Thanks, also, for helping them destroy the in-country networks she assembled to gather WMD-threat intelligence data (real threats, I mean, not the bullshit ones you helped spread far and wide...do you even know the difference between "real" and "bullshit" anymore, you jackal?).

When she was exposed, every person within her networks who was ever seen in public with her was blown as well. You might just have helped get some of them killed, Tim-bo. For real. Brewster-Jennings? Yeah, you helped fuck that all up, too.

But hey, at least you were able to weather the storm and maintain your cushy off-the-record-at-all-times relationships with all those senior Bush officials, especially the ones who used you to nuke Plame, her networks and her cover-story office.

You protect them, and in return they come on your breathtakingly useless Sunday blatherfest, and they spew bullshit, and you always allow their bullshit to pass unchallenged (real news people call these things "follow-up questions"; you should actually maybe ask one someday)...

...and because you're always so nice and off-the-record and shit, they keep coming back on your show for more unchallenged bullshit spewage, which makes you look like a real journalist to people who don't know any better, and you get invited to all the DC-power-people cocktail parties, and that's what matters, right?

Asshead.

(Sorry for the rant, here's the article, feast)

Tim Russert: Stop the Inanity

Russert passes for a "tough" interviewer by adopting a confrontational pose rather than asking genuinely challenging questions. Which is why he's a terrible moderator for our presidential debates.

By Paul Waldman
The American Prospect

October 31, 2007

Last month, near the end of the Democratic presidential debate in New Hampshire, moderator Tim Russert -- known as "Washington's toughest interviewer" and perhaps the most influential journalist in America -- had one last chance to pin the candidates down with his legendary common sense, persistence, and no-bull style. This is what he asked, first to Barack Obama: "There's been a lot of discussion about the Democrats and the issue of faith and values. I want to ask you a simple question. Senator Obama, what is your favorite Bible verse?"

(snip)

I have a fantasy that at one of these moments, a candidate will say, "You know what, Tim, I'm not going to answer that question. This is serious business. And you, sir, are a disgrace. You have in front of you a group of accomplished, talented leaders, one of whom will in all likelihood be the next president of the United States. You can ask them whatever you want. And you choose to engage in this ridiculous gotcha game, thinking up inane questions you hope will trick us into saying something controversial or stupid. Your fondest hope is that the answer to your question will destroy someone's campaign. You're not a journalist, you're the worst kind of hack, someone whose efforts not only don't contribute to a better informed electorate, they make everyone dumber. So no, I'm not going to stand here and try to come up with the most politically safe Bible verse to cite. Is that the best you can do?"

(snip)

If nothing else, at least we're deep enough into the presidential campaign that we don't have to suffer through Russert's endless "Are you running for president? Are you? Are you?" quizzing of potential candidates. But that's what passes for being a "tough" interviewer these days: the pose of confrontation rather than genuinely challenging questions, the query designed to embarrass rather than enlighten, the worship of, rather than the challenge to, conventional wisdom.

The two parties' nominees will be decided three months from now, and we can be sure that in that time, at least one or two candidates will have their campaigns upended by the answer they gave to an absurd question, delivered by Tim Russert or someone like him, about what their favorite Bible verse is, or whom they want to win the Super Bowl, or what kind of beer they like. "Aha!" the reporters will shout, as though they actually unearthed something revealing on which the race for the presidency of the most powerful nation on earth should be decided. The one whose tiny little mind devised the question will be praised to the stars for his journalistic acumen.

And they'll continue to wonder why so many Americans are so cynical about our electoral process.

BOOM: http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=tim_russert_stop_the_inanity