Howie the K's Moral Outrage

.
Oh, my, Howie Kurtz is on a tear this morning. Ripping into Carville and Begala for tainting his precious CNN with their presence as guest pundits because they may have been too cozy with their ol' buddy Rahm about the matter of Drug-Rush Limbaugh.

And minutes later, reading with sarcasm dripping from his tongue, clips from newspapers that may imply that the media themselves are too cozy with the new O-crowd in DC.

I admit I was in and out a bit, so I may have missed his takedown of Roger Ailes, the head of an entire network that a whole lot of people actually think is a news channel, for saying they were going to battle against Obama until the last shot is fired.... Anybody see that? Did it happen?

That takes what one Kurtz guest called "narrowcasting"--instead of broadcasting--to a whole new level...of muck. And probably also explains the recent metamorphosis of CNBC from an obscure business network into the Santellized conservative network of GE-NBC.

Maybe Kurtz should look to his own political biases and cozy relationships and make them transparent. As Joan Walsh constructively noted at one point in the Begala Carville blather, she has no problem with them being on the network in the role they fill...as pundits...as long as there's transparency.

And given the as-I-key Donna Brazile/Mary Matalin discussion, doesn't seem to me Kurtz has much of an argument against pundits expressing their viewpoint if they have "cozy" relationships with powers in the White House. Who could forget that photo of Mary Matalin, after all, hovering over the power table in the White House after 9/11 as they began ramping up the lies that led us into Iraq.
.
.
All of which makes my head hurt. Couldn't they just report the news and we form our own opinions?
.
crossposted at firedoglake's Oxdown Gazette