MR

Now that is a shocker...

Tim Russert of NBC News has died at the age of 58, the network says.

I genuinely liked his work. Far too young. Rest in peace.

Onestepper wrote:Now that is a shocker...

Tim Russert of NBC News has died at the age of 58, the network says.

WHAT?!? Sad! Always liked that guy... Very sad indeed, and a loss to the news networks.

Wow, that sucks. Way too young.

I just heard Charlie Gibson talking about it. That is very sad.

Holy crap! I really liked that guy. Very sad.

Too young. Condolences to his family & colleagues.

What an exit! Nobody got to say "goodbye"; he just left without any farewells. Perhaps he lived his life knowing death could call upon him at any time and he had prepared in his life a fast farwell; my hope is that when he left that he had already had said "goodbye" with sincere hopes of "seeing you again".

i cant believe this! 58 and died of a heart attack at work .. unreal....

OMG. I could not be more stunned. I really liked him. Very fair person and did his job well.

Enigma869 wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/13/tim.russert/index.html

Thanks JFB!!!



So Sad!!! Condolences to his family and friends!!

I haven't been this taken aback by a death announcement since John Ritter. WOW

A traitor to democracy and an enabler of high crimes.
As recently as a month ago he had frequent commentator Arianna Huffington banned from all NBC airwaves because she dared cast a scrutinizing look at his journalistic skills in her book.
That's not faithfully carrying out one's responsibility as a member of the fourth estate - and that's why my remorse is somewhat accompanied by a tinge of relief.
If any silver lining exists out of such a tragedy, it will be having the flagship Sunday political gabfest hosted by someone intimately aware of his or her public duty.

Total shock. Always liked watching/listening to this guy. I swear I just saw him on the news like yesterday. Wow.


later~

Eric wrote:I haven't been this taken aback by a death announcement since John Ritter. WOW

That is exactly how it feels.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:A traitor to democracy and an enabler of high crimes.
As recently as a month ago he had frequent commentator Arianna Huffington banned from all NBC airwaves because she dared cast a scrutinizing look at his journalistic skills in her book.
That's not faithfully carrying out one's responsibility as a member of the fourth estate - and that's why my remorse is somewhat accompanied by a tinge of relief.
If any silver lining exists out of such a tragedy, it will be having the flagship Sunday political gabfest hosted by someone intimately aware of his or her public duty.

I don't find relief in anyone dieing just because they did something as trivial as removing someone from a news network. That's a sad way to look at his passing.

...just terrible news

Onestepper wrote:I don't find relief in anyone dieing just because they did something as trivial as removing someone from a news network.

As if my opinion on Russert is informed by his singular action of censoring Arianna - I don't care about her.
That recent fact just serves to show what a Beltway cocktail weiner circuit insider he was.
Russert was a dangerous man.
The way he couched everything in the innocuous rhetoric of "Go Bears!" or his relatable hardscrabble Buffalo roots made him all the more dangerous.
His moderation of the debates this year has been particularly reckless.

Onestepper wrote:That's a sad way to look at his passing.

I agree.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote:
Russert was a dangerous man.
The way he couched everything in the innocuous rhetoric of "Go Bears!" or his relatable hardscrabble Buffalo roots made him all the more dangerous.
His moderation of the debates this year has been particularly reckless.

Sorry, not following your logic that he was a 'dangerous' man. He may have been a cocktail insider..but can you please explain to me how that makes him dangerous? Was his 'rhetoric' different from any other on-air talk show host? Keith Olbermann, or Bill O'Reilly?

Onestepper wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote:
Russert was a dangerous man.
The way he couched everything in the innocuous rhetoric of "Go Bears!" or his relatable hardscrabble Buffalo roots made him all the more dangerous.
His moderation of the debates this year has been particularly reckless.

Sorry, not following your logic that he was a 'dangerous' man. He may have been a cocktail insider..but can you please explain to me how that makes him dangerous? Was his 'rhetoric' different from any other on-air talk show host? Keith Olbermann, or Bill O'Reilly?

Mr. Russert actually seemed like a fair, objective interviewer/commentator compared to the above 2 people.

annie89509 wrote:

Onestepper wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote:
Russert was a dangerous man.
The way he couched everything in the innocuous rhetoric of "Go Bears!" or his relatable hardscrabble Buffalo roots made him all the more dangerous.
His moderation of the debates this year has been particularly reckless.

Sorry, not following your logic that he was a 'dangerous' man. He may have been a cocktail insider..but can you please explain to me how that makes him dangerous? Was his 'rhetoric' different from any other on-air talk show host? Keith Olbermann, or Bill O'Reilly?

Mr. Russert actually seemed like a fair, objective interviewer/commentator compared to the above 2 people.

Most statements being released now from the political personalities he interviewed are along the same line. He was tough, but he was fair.

Although he was born in Buffalo he lived many years here in Cleveland and attended John Carroll University and Cleveland State University. He always referred to Cleveland as his second hometown.

He always seemed like a very nice and friendly person.

Onestepper wrote: Was his 'rhetoric' different from any other on-air talk show host? Keith Olbermann, or Bill O'Reilly?

"Meet the Press" is held to a higher standard than either of those shows.
Time and again, Russert failed the people.

Remember what was written on the Cheney memo weighing the pros and cons of which talk show to use to sell the WMD lie.
Under the pros of "Meet the Press" it said - “control message.”
Pretty much says it all.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote: Was his 'rhetoric' different from any other on-air talk show host? Keith Olbermann, or Bill O'Reilly?

"Meet the Press" is held to a higher standard than either of those shows.
Time and again, Russert failed the people.

Remember what was written on the Cheney memo weighing the pros and cons of which talk show to use to sell the WMD lie.
Under the pros of "Meet the Press" it said - “control message.”
Pretty much says it all.

Yeah, that makes him dangerous.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Onestepper wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote: Was his 'rhetoric' different from any other on-air talk show host? Keith Olbermann, or Bill O'Reilly?

"Meet the Press" is held to a higher standard than either of those shows.
Time and again, Russert failed the people.

Remember what was written on the Cheney memo weighing the pros and cons of which talk show to use to sell the WMD lie.
Under the pros of "Meet the Press" it said - “control message.”
Pretty much says it all.

Yeah, that makes him dangerous.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Simple, but funny as hell!!! Nicely done.

Onestepper wrote:Yeah, that makes him dangerous.

That was just one example, but yes, letting the Vice President bang the war drums unaccounted is very dangerous.

As host of the Sunday morning show considered the gold standard for all political newshours; moreover, as the NBC Washington Bureau Chief, he was entrusted with a certain public responsibility. In my view, he broke it as often as he upheld it, if not moreso.
If you were to dumb to notice, that's not my problem.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote:Yeah, that makes him dangerous.

That was just one example, but yes, letting the Vice President bang the war drums unaccounted is very dangerous.

As host of the Sunday morning show considered the gold standard for all political newshours; moreover, as the NBC Washington Bureau Chief, he was entrusted with a certain public responsibility. In my view, he broke it as often as he upheld it, if not moreso.
If you were to dumb to notice, that's not my problem.

You are right. I long to be as wise as you. Show me the light oh intellectual leader.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Onestepper wrote:Yeah, that makes him dangerous.

That was just one example, but yes, letting the Vice President bang the war drums unaccounted is very dangerous.

Maybe I misunderstood, but doesn't Cheney's "Control message" on Cheney's card a reminder to himself? Russert didn't ask Cheney to "Control message" did he?

Onestepper wrote:You are right. I long to be as wise as you. Show me the light oh intellectual leader.

I didn't really want to turn this thread about a dead man into a pissing match, but ok.
I've got plenty more examples where Russert was remiss in his job.
Anyone who watched some of his election coverage this year should already be all-too-familiar with them (gotcha tactics, trivial UFO, and sports questions).
The limpwristed press in this country is part of the reason we are in as bad a shape as we are in.
Out of the modern staple of anchors, few possed more sway than Tim Russert.